Notifications
Clear all

[Solved] Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???  

  RSS
JBinFL
(@jbinfl)
Reputable Member
Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???

Hello All:

Quick question.  I was checking for driver and firmware updates today and in reviewing my files previously downloaded, I noticed that I had a driver 2_3_0 for both Mk3 and Mini which is dated last March / April 2020. 

I cannot remember where i got it and noticed the most recent versions of the drivers are 2_2_9_1 and do not see it in the history for drivers

Was there ever a 2_3_0 driver package that perhaps was recalled or something that I forgot about?

I am not going to install it, but it was bothering me where it came from...

Thank you

Strange women, laying in ponds, distributing swords, is hardly a basis for a system of governance!

Posted : 16/10/2020 5:12 pm
--
 --
(@)
Illustrious Member
RE: Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???

I noticed the same mystery - I suspect it is a Mk3 vs Mk3s or Mini difference. 

The file on my machine is Prusa Signed, dated March 23, 2020 7:31.03 = 0eb1b7e9ac15637638310cc5288e8fee

 

Posted : 16/10/2020 5:45 pm
--
 --
(@)
Illustrious Member
RE: Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???

I noticed the same mystery - I suspect it is a Mk3 vs Mk3s or Mini difference. 

The 2.3.0.0 file on my machine is Prusa Signed, dated March 23, 2020 07:31 SHA5 = 0eb1b7e9ac15637638310cc5288e8fee

The 2.2.9.1 file on my machine is Prusa Signed, dated  July  13, 2020 03:03 SHA5 = 0eb1b7e9ac15637638310cc5288e8fee

Oddly - even with a binary compare failing; both 2.2.9.1 and 2.3.0. are supposed to have the same checksum. So something is amiss.

And checksums on 2.2.9.1 do not match the certificates.

D:\Tools\Applications\Prusa 3D Printer>fciv prusa3d_win_2_2_9_1.exe
//
// File Checksum Integrity Verifier version 2.05.
//
8c5f0711cae119e955911ffc67d77405 prusa3d_win_2_2_9_1.exe

D:\Tools\Applications\Prusa 3D Printer>fciv prusa3D_win_2_3_0.exe
//
// File Checksum Integrity Verifier version 2.05.
//
d4328d12a7986c014b3f8bebf392f9c7 prusa3d_win_2_3_0.exe

 

 

This post was modified 4 years ago by --
Posted : 16/10/2020 5:55 pm
--
 --
(@)
Illustrious Member
RE: Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???

Bug entered ... https://github.com/prusa3d/Prusa-Firmware/issues/2861

[BUG] Build Checksum / Versioning Error #2861

Posted : 16/10/2020 6:15 pm
karl-herbert
(@karl-herbert)
Illustrious Member
RE: Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???

somehow confusing and unusual. I have set up my laptop (W10) and installed the current v2.2.9.1 - no immediately visible difference to the older V2.3.0. PS is V 2.2.0.

 
 

Statt zu klagen, dass wir nicht alles haben, was wir wollen, sollten wir lieber dankbar sein, dass wir nicht alles bekommen, was wir verdienen.

Posted : 16/10/2020 8:30 pm
JBinFL
(@jbinfl)
Reputable Member
Topic starter answered:
RE: Drivers Question version 2_3_0 ???

Tim-M30 & Karl:

Thank you for the responses, as I was concerned how I got that download and where it came from, which prompted me to do some digging.  I think understand what happened and believe this is related to a naming convention issue with the incorporation of Prusa Slicer into the driver download package... 

I saw this on the Knowledge Base article for updating drivers which clearly shows a MK3 & MK3S driver download with the 2_3_0 version...  There is no 2_3_0 version in the older driver download list, which prompted my question as to how I got a 2_3_0 when the latest posted is 2_2_9_1.

So I went to the Github post of tim-M30 (Thank You!) and then looked around at the Github for Prusa Slicer, which shows Prusa Slicer 2.2.0 but the version is 2.3.0-Alpha0 and is dated as March 21, 2020, as shown below.  hmm....

I think whomever named the driver download back in March 2020 when it was posted must have incorrectly switched to the Prusa Slicer naming convention from the drivers naming convention and then later realized what happened and retroactively fixed it...

Well, at least it seems to have come from Prusa and not some rogue download which was my concern.  I am still not going to use it since I replaced it with the 2_2_9_1, but there seems to be a plausible reason for the weird naming, which at least we got that solved.

Thank you again!

 

Strange women, laying in ponds, distributing swords, is hardly a basis for a system of governance!

Posted : 16/10/2020 10:24 pm
Share: