minor edits to see the GPIO pins on ESP32-C6-WROOM-1

[shailensobhee]

I tested your new C6-build on the ESP32-C6-WROOM-1 board (more precisely, ESP32-C6-DevKitC-1-N4 and it works :) There were some minor issues which I am not sure yet why.
The board I purchased is this one: link

First, my board is listed as ESP32-UNK13. I expected C6 instead of UNK13. Do you know why could htat be so?

Also a few questions: In the partitions, you have app0, app1 - Are you putting anything in the app1 partition? Since there is only the ESPSomfy-RTS app running, maybe taking most of the space would be better? Or you use one partition for OTA updates?

Also, when checking " Enable Radio" and then clicking "Save Radio" , the index.js file bugs out at the line below, which the page stuck with the spinning spinner. Since I wasn't sure if the Pins where being saved, I hardcoded the right GPIO pins in Somfy.cpp . Also, since somehow my c6 board is not recognised as a c6 board (rather, UNK13), I had to modify the index.js file PinMaps so that I could see all the GPIO pins to select.

[shailensobhee]

Also, since the latest version appears to be 3.0.7 as per the releases in the Github Release section, maybe we should also update this file? https://github.com/cjkas/ESPSomfy-RTS/blob/main/data-src/appversion ?

Currently under Firmware:

[cjkas]

Where did you found this UNK13? In logs ? This seems like detection problem.
Wasn't aware of the 'when checking " Enable Radio" and then clicking "Save Radio" , the index.js file bugs/' but I can confirm I have the same error.
I'm not using the OTA now but the plan is to use it and there is really no benefit to expand the app space at least which I know.

[shailensobhee]

Where did you found this UNK13? In logs ? This seems like detection problem. Wasn't aware of the 'when checking " Enable Radio" and then clicking "Save Radio" , the index.js file bugs/' but I can confirm I have the same error. I'm not using the OTA now but the plan is to use it and there is really no benefit to expand the app space at least which I know.

I see ESP-UNK-13 in the app under System > Firmware. I opened an issue on this: #15

I'm also trying to dig where this comes from.

[shailensobhee]

Fixed the ESP32-C6 platform detection issue.. Possible Claude Code inserted a bunch of the ifdefs

Especially in ConfigSettings.cpp , the ifdef was unnecessary. I removed it and now the platform is properly detected:

switch(ci.model) {
    case esp_chip_model_t::CHIP_ESP32:
      strcpy(this->chipModel, "");
      break;
    case esp_chip_model_t::CHIP_ESP32S3:
      strcpy(this->chipModel, "s3");
      break;
    case esp_chip_model_t::CHIP_ESP32C3:
      strcpy(this->chipModel, "c3");
      break;
    case esp_chip_model_t::CHIP_ESP32C6:
      strcpy(this->chipModel, "c6");
      break;
    default:
      sprintf(this->chipModel, "UNK%d", static_cast<int>(ci.model));
      break;
  }

[shailensobhee]

updated code logic to pick FW/App version from appversion under data-src instead of hardcoded app/fw versions from js/html/cpp files.

[cjkas]

I've fixed the bkp bug here #17 and the versioning within the build scripts.
Seems that this PR is not building. Can you check?

[shailensobhee]

Merged your new edits from the last few days, placed back the improvements on top of your updates. Can we now check if the PR is building?

[shailensobhee]

All builds pass on my side - I guess they should too on your side:

[cjkas]

Can we stick to just one build.yaml in the main repo? Adding a second ci.yaml is harder to maintain. I've unified everything to use one build.yaml for both PR builds and release builds to prevent issues where a PR passes but the release build fails because it's testing different steps.

[shailensobhee]

Sure. We proceed with build.yaml

[shailensobhee]

PS: I'm travelling and back in 4 days. I'll make the necessary edits and update the PR when I'm back.

[cjkas]

I've approved and solved some conflicts with my changes. It's waiting for merge.

[shailensobhee]

A few things: file versions are still hard-coded in some files, like index.js:
Example appVersion = 'v3.0.11'; -> becomes appVersion = getAppVersion(); in my implementation.

This function picks the app version from one file: data-src\appversion. This means, you have the app version in only one place, as opposed to hard-coding in several places.

Do you want to pick my implementation? I think it is a bit cleaner and reduces code maintenance, right?

[shailensobhee]

Alright done - I took your latest code, and added the changes from the previous PR (example the getAppVersion() function, settled on one build.yaml file [your original], etc.. )

Can you check on your side if all looks good?

Also - not yet done - in index.html we have the hardcoded appversions still. I haven't changed that yet. Also, unsure where there is a "c" at the end of the file-version. Typo? We could make this dynamic, where app version is picked from data\appversion and keep the main.css?v=<version> format. We have this ?v=<version> actually to force the browser to always fetch the css files (preventing loading from cache).