Same script, different result on Fairino FR10 - read-only connection verification

HassanBrown0878 · 17 May 2026, 13:48 UTC

Reply to discussion
HA
HassanBrown0878
I rebuilt our laptop, and the read-only script for read-only connection verification on Fairino FR10 now rejects an argument before contacting the controller. The old laptop still runs the same script. I've found several SDK folders, but no record of which copy it uses. Our setup is in a workshop inspection station, with an inspection fixture as the reference item.

17 replies

NA
NaomiArcher0419
Replying to HassanBrown0878

@HassanBrown0878 Check the imported path on both laptops, from your script's actual interpreter. Folder names won't tell you what's running.

16 points
HA
HassanBrown0878
Replying to NaomiArcher0419

Different paths. Our vendor folder on the old laptop, an installed package on the rebuild. I'd compared everything except the imports, apparently.

23 points
NA
NaomiArcher0419
Replying to HassanBrown0878

@HassanBrown0878 Keep your working copy. Compare signatures, then recreate it in an isolated environment. That should settle the laptop side.

8 points
LU
LucyBarnes0567
Replying to NaomiArcher0419

@NaomiArcher0419 Too certain. Matching the SDK might fix the argument error while dependencies or the launcher still differ.

-1 points
NA
NaomiArcher0419
Replying to LucyBarnes0567

@LucyBarnes0567 You're right; I overstated it. Match the interpreter, dependencies and launcher too, then compare the documented read-only result.

7 points
HA
HassanBrown0878
Replying to NaomiArcher0419

Found it: the rejected argument has a different signature. Both copies are intact, and our working laptop is untouched.

22 points
AN
AnilBell0636
Replying to HassanBrown0878

Why not change the argument? I'd have tried that first.

22 points
NA
NaomiArcher0419
Replying to AnilBell0636

It might pass the argument check. You still need that SDK's documentation and a confirmed controller pairing to establish the rest.

12 points
DI
DineshBrown0908
Replying to NaomiArcher0419

@NaomiArcher0419 I had a terminal pointing at one environment and a shortcut at another on my setup. My triumphant fix covered exactly one way of launching it.

19 points
HA
HassanBrown0878
Replying to DineshBrown0908

Checked our launcher too. Same installed-package path as the terminal.

13 points
AN
AnilBell0636
Replying to NaomiArcher0419

@NaomiArcher0419 Are SDK and controller version numbers supposed to match?

18 points
NA
NaomiArcher0419
Replying to AnilBell0636

@AnilBell0636 Don't assume so. Keep both identifiers and look for a documented pairing, or ask support to confirm that pair.

5 points
HA
HassanBrown0878
Replying to NaomiArcher0419

@NaomiArcher0419 Our maintenance record and the controller version screen agree. The loose end is the vendor folder: I haven't tied it to an identifiable release archive.

7 points
DI
DineshBrown0908
Replying to HassanBrown0878

Checksums help compare copies. They won't identify the publisher, release or supported pairing for your mystery folder.

21 points
LU
LucyBarnes0567
Replying to DineshBrown0908

Could your vendor folder have local modifications? If so, an archive checksum comparison might never produce a match.

2 points
HA
HassanBrown0878
Replying to LucyBarnes0567

I've narrowed this to different imported SDK copies, but haven't established a supported replacement environment. That's progress, with the rebuild still open.

23 points
NA
NaomiArcher0419
Replying to HassanBrown0878

Different imports are a useful lead. Keeping the rebuild open until the supported environment is established matches what you've found.

12 points

Add to the discussion

Welcome to Application Robot

Everyone can read the forum. Sign in or create an account to start a discussion, reply, or upload photos.

Forgot your password?

By creating an account, you agree to our Terms and Conditions and community guidelines. Read our Privacy Policy for how your information is handled.