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

Board name for Circuit Dojo in mRF91 Quickstart #131

Closed
vitprajzler opened this issue Dec 28, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #139
Closed

Board name for Circuit Dojo in mRF91 Quickstart #131

vitprajzler opened this issue Dec 28, 2021 · 4 comments · Fixed by #139

Comments

@vitprajzler
Copy link
Contributor

The current Zephyr release has only two boards defined for the Circuit Dojo Feathers,
circuitdojo_feather_nrf9160 and circuitdojo_feather_nrf9160ns.

The nRF91 quickstart guide lists circuitdojo_feather_nrf9160_ns as target, which does not exist. It should say one of the board names above.

@szczys
Copy link
Collaborator

szczys commented Jan 4, 2022

nRF91 Quick Start overview page page directs user to hardware section. This should probably be updated to the Board Catalog section:

See the Hardware section for more devices that use the nRF91

https://docs.golioth.io/hardware/nrf91/quickstart

ChrisGammell added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2022
…nging docs to match actual behavior until board names are pushed upstream by CircuitDojo
@mniestroj
Copy link
Contributor

circuitdojo_feather_nrf9160_ns is the correct name, so docs are right in that case. However wrong NCS revision was specified, which is why circuitdojo_feather_nrf9160_ns was non-existing and circuitdojo_feather_nrf9160ns was. So after merging #139 and following quickstart for nRF91 Feather, everything should work.

szczys pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2022
…nging docs to match actual behavior until board names are pushed upstream by CircuitDojo
szczys pushed a commit that referenced this issue Jan 5, 2022
…nging docs to match actual behavior until board names are pushed upstream by CircuitDojo
@vitprajzler
Copy link
Contributor Author

Changes in #139 fix this. Closing.

@mniestroj
Copy link
Contributor

@vitprajzler FYI when #139 would be merged, then this issue would be closed automatically due to usage of "Fixes: <issue_number>" in PR description (see https://docs.github.com/en/issues/tracking-your-work-with-issues/linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue#linking-a-pull-request-to-an-issue-using-a-keyword). So there is no need to do it manually.

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