Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Can we have dual OTA? #155

Closed
muntakim1 opened this issue Oct 9, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #180
Closed

Can we have dual OTA? #155

muntakim1 opened this issue Oct 9, 2023 · 2 comments · Fixed by #180

Comments

@muntakim1
Copy link

What I mean by dual OTA is one OTA will responsible for checking any OTA provisioned by the things board ide, and another OTA will update the OTA updater!

If we make changes to the device token or wifi config we can send a new OTA to the device to adapt those changes into the 1st OTA partition and the same bin file will be responsible if there are any changes in pin config to the device OTA? Can we do that?

@MathewHDYT
Copy link
Contributor

MathewHDYT commented Oct 9, 2023

Sorry the question is slightly confusing, just to be sure.

First of all I am assuming you are using an ESP32.
From what I can discern from your text you want to change the configuration of your device, because you want to use OTA for that process I am assuming those variables are hardcoded in the code itself.

same bin file will be responsible if there are any changes in pin config to the device OTA

I sadly do no quite understand what you mean with this part.

@dennis-si
Copy link

What I've done in the past, is copy all the firmware functions and strings, rename it to software.
This way you are able to use the update software function on thingsboard server.
The only difference is the last stage, where I save it to spiffs. Then I use a RPC to transfer the file to a STM32F connected to the ESP32.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

3 participants