Try if this matches your case:
I looked it over although I cant figure out how to get the same settings they had. I don't see the option for it anywhere.
You might need to install board package on IDE board manager.
Did you verify what's written on your chip?
its 328P-LQFP32
how do I know which pakage to get?
Have a look instructions here:
Thanks for the help!!! It works!
Had to install the right board files, change upload speed and clock divider then it worked!
2 Likes
Good news, especially since you have many of them.
Can you post a link to the vendor page. I've looked around and the "Nano" devices with the near-clone LGT8F328P chip which I have found all have a "one-side" board design with the USB chip also on the upper layer. The picture you have shown appears to have the well known CH340 "double side" type board design but, of course, without using the original ATMEGA328P chip.
If these clones get popular, I guess we are going to see a few forum posts reporting similar issues to the ones you are encountering.
Yes, thanks, that is the one. It appears indistinguishable from the popular CH340 Nanos which otherwise have an ATmega328P chip. I suppose the only clue, apart from any silkscreen markings, such as LQFP32, is that any markings on the chip itself have been sanded off. The name "nulllab" from the software package was enough to help me find one on Amazon as well:
It looks like the installation process has been improved so that that the board package can be loaded via a JSON file URL in the IDE preferences, at least with the nulllaborg fork of the original LGTMCU library. I wonder if that is now the board package to be recommended for users who get hold of these clones ?
EDIT
OK. I've just seen that the Amazon retailer ELEGOO recommends the following board package: GitHub - emakefun/arduino_nulllab: Hardware support package for Larduino : Maybe users who have some experience of the these clones can say which board package fork, if any, is to be recommended.
404 response
"404 response"
Oops. It took the final ':' which I placed after the URL as part of the URL itself.
Now corrected. Thanks.
The one OP used is more recently updated, no idea which one is better though.
I guess that the clue is the attention given to the issues in the repository as to which one is likely to be better.
Anyway, I haven't got one of these clones and will not be doing much more on this topic. My attention was alerted only because of the appearance of such Nanos, practically indistinguishable from the popular CH340 Nanos, but with a "near-clone" chip, possibly leading to problem reports in this forum.
In particular, the OP's experience seems to be that it was quite possible to install a sketch onto the "Nano" without installing the appropriate board package, however, even a very simple sketch to print a message to the serial console failed.
The GitHub - dbuezas/lgt8fx: Board Package for Logic Green LGT8F328P LGT8F328D and LGT8F88D platform can also be installed via the Arduino IDE Boards Manager.
That is an outdated fork of this one:
https://github.com/emakefun/arduino_nulllab doesn't contain any work that is not present in https://github.com/nulllaborg/arduino_nulllab, so I am skeptical that it is of any value.
I have used GitHub - dbuezas/lgt8fx: Board Package for Logic Green LGT8F328P LGT8F328D and LGT8F88D and it worked perfectly from my minimal usage. I have always recommended that one when supporting Arduino users and haven't received any feedback that indicated it was significantly flawed.
1 Like
OK. Thanks. That and your containing post makes the situation much clearer.
Interestingly, I saw that user "emakefun" was also updating this repository GitHub - nulllaborg/arduino_nulllab: Hardware support package for LGT AVR Compatible Chips so these may not be independent developments.
What often happens is that a GitHub user makes a fork of an existing repository solely for the purposes of preparing or testing work they intend to contribute to the upstream project, then never gets around to deleting their fork after they have completed that work.
Some people also fork repositories upon which their projects depend solely to have a backup in the event the upstream repository is deleted.
GitHub doesn't provide any formal mechanism for differentiating inconsequential forks that are created for either of those reasons vs. forks that are created by developers who either want to take the project in a different direction, or to carry on the maintenance of an abandoned project (I call these "hard forks").
1 Like
OK. Thanks. That sounds very plausible. Fortunately there are some signs that can help show that a library/Github repository is dead such as lack of attention to issues etc. Incidentally, I've added a small number of these LGT8F328P devices to my shopping list since my curiosity has now been aroused. I can't get the exact boards here that the OP has got hold of (CH340 pattern Nano clone with LGT8F328P) but similar enough that I can see what they can do.
Another good indication is this information that is shown on the GitHub repository home page:
This branch is 48 commits behind
nulllaborg/arduino_nulllab:master.
In this case, we can see from the message that the emakefun/arduino_nulllab fork is outdated compared to the parent nulllaborg/arduino_nulllab repository, and doesn't contain any work that is not present in the parent.
If we look at the same information in the nulllaborg/arduino_nulllab repository (which is actually in turn a fork of the LGTMCU/Larduino_HSP repository, we see this message:
This branch is 97 commits ahead of
LGTMCU/Larduino_HSP:master.
So in this case we know that there is a significant amount of work in nulllaborg/arduino_nulllab which is not present in the parent repository. This indicates that it is a "hard fork".
In other cases, we might see a message like this:
https://github.com/stevstrong/Arduino_STM32/
This branch is 360 commits ahead of, 12 commits behind
rogerclarkmelbourne/Arduino_STM32:master.
So this fork has a significant amount of work that is not present in the parent rogerclarkmelbourne/Arduino_STM32:master repo, but is also missing some of the work that is present in the parent. In this specific case, the large amount of unique work in the fork is a clear sign that it is a "hard fork". The missing work from the parent could be things that the fork maintainer hasn't gotten around to pulling in, or it could be things that are not relevant to the fork.
1 Like