Nickez/new firmware targets#1980
Open
NickeZ wants to merge 4 commits into
Open
Conversation
Replace internal Plus platform and product symbols with Nova names across C, Rust, Python, tests, and build helpers. Keep identifying protocol strings, target names, magic values, and platform byte values unchanged.
Build firmware-nova and firmware-nova-btc as separate CMake artifacts while keeping them identical to the existing multi and BTC-only firmware variants for now.
NickeZ
force-pushed
the
nickez/new-firmware-targets
branch
from
75505cf to
027194d
Compare
benma
requested changes
Jun 1, 2026
benma
requested changes
Jun 1, 2026
Keep the existing BITBOX02PLUS public symbols while preserving the Nova product strings introduced by the firmware target rename.
Build the Nova firmware targets with PRODUCT_BITBOX_NOVA_MULTI and PRODUCT_BITBOX_NOVA_BTCONLY instead of the classic BitBox02 product macros. Update the firmware-side product string, OP_INFO edition byte, and Nova USB descriptor checks to recognize the Nova macros.
Collaborator
|
https://github.com/BitBoxSwiss/bitbox02-firmware/blob/master/releases/README.md?plain=1#L8 This sentence needs to be changed to say that it was the same until v9.26.1, but different afterwards. |
benma
reviewed
Jun 1, 2026
| 'B', 0, 'i', 0, 't', 0, 'B', 0, 'o', 0, 'x', 0, '0', 0, '2', 0, ' ', 0, 'N', 0, 'o', \ | ||
| 0, 'v', 0, 'a', 0, ' ', 0, 'F', 0, 'a', 0, 'c', 0, 't', 0, 'o', 0, 'r', 0, 'y', 0, | ||
| #elif PRODUCT_BITBOX_BTCONLY == 1 | ||
| #elif PRODUCT_BITBOX_NOVA_BTCONLY == 1 |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We should at some point do a compile time selection of this file instead of dynamic based on the memory flag. (This file is also compiled for BB02, so the BB02 btconly binary will now contain 'multi' string inside 😅
| #error "unknown product" | ||
| #endif | ||
| #else | ||
| // Currently we have one firmware for both BB02 and BB02_NOVA, and only the |
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Maybe leave a comment to explain that the below is only needed for Nova, but since BLE stuff is still compiled for BB02, it needs to be defined anyway. (Is this true?)
benma
reviewed
Jun 1, 2026
Collaborator
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same file on line 347:
vec!["-DTESTING", "-D_UNIT_TEST_", "-DPRODUCT_BITBOX_MULTI=1"]
Should this maybe be PRODUCT_BITBOX_NOVA_MULTI?
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
No description provided.