Conversation
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: https://discuss.px4.io/t/px4-dev-call-june-11-2025-team-sync-and-community-q-a/45976/1 |
1c18d9f to
4587160
Compare
Louis-max-H
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have tested this version with Septentrio receiver and Jamming/Spoofing emulation.
|
Hi 👋
I need more time to check raim (default value is not 0 in mavlink message) |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: https://discuss.px4.io/t/px4-dev-call-june-25-2025-team-sync-and-community-q-a/46161/3 |
|
@hamishwillee can you check wha'ts wrong with the docs ci? |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: https://discuss.px4.io/t/px4-dev-call-june-25-2025-team-sync-and-community-q-a/46161/1 |
Yes, it's an error in a translation file that should have been removed. I'm fixing this in #25120 |
dakejahl
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Wouldn't it make more sense to create a new separate uORB message for this data? As far as I know this data is specific to Septentrio GPSs. If we used a separate publisher we wouldn't have the issue with zero initialization for these added fields, and this wouldn't impact any of the other GPS code. The GNSS_INTEGRITY mavlink stream could then subscribe to this new message, such that the mavlink message is only emitted when a septentrio receiver is connected and publishing.
790eaf6 to
784a25a
Compare
784a25a to
67b544b
Compare
ae9a21f to
a491864
Compare
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: https://discuss.px4.io/t/px4-dev-call-sep-3-2025-team-sync-and-community-q-a/47287/1 |
|
@dagar, hi. I have applied your suggestions and tested. let me know if I should adjust it more |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: https://discuss.px4.io/t/px4-dev-call-sep-10-2025-team-sync-and-community-q-a/47336/1 |
|
hey @dagar, only MacOS build failed. is it ready for final review/ merge 🥺? |
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: https://discuss.px4.io/t/px4-dev-call-sep-17-2025-team-sync-and-community-q-a/47445/2 |
|
What's this waiting on now then @dagar - should we merge it? |
|
Congrats @Tory9 @Louis-max-H |
And from me! |
|
Yes, thanks everyone ! |
Co-authored-by: Tory9 <vvpost05@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Tory9 <vvpost05@gmail.com>
Co-authored-by: Tory9 <vvpost05@gmail.com>
|
This pull request has been mentioned on Discussion Forum for PX4, Pixhawk, QGroundControl, MAVSDK, MAVLink. There might be relevant details there: |
Co-authored-by: Tory9 <vvpost05@gmail.com>

Solved Problem
When errors occur in attached GNSS receivers, there is no way to report them to the user so they know what is going wrong.
This PR is needed by QGC : mavlink/qgroundcontrol#13009
This is an update of PR made by @flyingthingsintothings #23096
Solution
CONFIG_MAVLINK_DIALECT="development"to yourdefault.px4boardChangelog Entry
For release notes:
Test coverage
Context