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

ADM-CID 407 & 408 #55

Open
wants to merge 2 commits into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

ADM-CID 407 & 408 #55

wants to merge 2 commits into from

Conversation

amitfin
Copy link

@amitfin amitfin commented Sep 20, 2023

Pima Force 144 alarm uses "ADM-CID" format.

407 Code

The alarm system has a mobile app PIMAlink 3.0 which can be used to arm and disarm the alarm system.
When using the mobile app (and not the keypad), the alarm is sending event 407: "Remote arm/disarm":
2023-09-21 01:59:23.136 DEBUG (MainThread) [pysiaalarm.base_server] Incoming line: 7449003F"ADM-CID"0078R1L0#AAAA[#00AAAA|3407 01 001]_01:59:16,09-21-2023

408 Code

When using the keypad's "arm away" button, the alarm sends event 408: "Quick arm"
2023-10-04 13:26:45.185 DEBUG (MainThread) [pysiaalarm.base_server] Incoming line: 9B2F0041"ADM-CID"1285R1L0#AAAAAA[#AAAAAA|3408 01 000]_13:26:16,10-04-2023

image

(ADM-CID code can be found here).

Adding new mappings for events 407 & 408.

The updated mapping file was tested with our alarm system and it's working as expected. The state of the alarm entity is getting updated correctly.

@amitfin
Copy link
Author

amitfin commented Oct 2, 2023

Not sure why tests were failing (Tox passes locally), but according to the log the failed test case seems unrelated to this change (not even ADM-CID):
testSIA.test_parse_and_check[encrypted-altered_key-siadcs]

@amitfin amitfin changed the title ADM-CID 407 ADM-CID 407 & 408 Oct 4, 2023
@amitfin
Copy link
Author

amitfin commented Oct 4, 2023

Regarding the errors in the tests:

This is the output of tox when running locally in the dev-environment (docker):

py38: SKIP (0.35 seconds)
py39: OK (46.80=setup[14.09]+cmd[32.71] seconds)
py310: OK (85.34=setup[52.08]+cmd[33.27] seconds)
py311: SKIP (0.02 seconds)
mypy: OK (36.20=setup[35.30]+cmd[0.91] seconds)
congratulations :) (168.93 seconds)

(devcontainer.json was changed locally with "VARIANT": "3.10", so py310 will be executed. This is the verion which failed in the workflow).

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 this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

1 participant