rayw-dronesense

Oh, I didn't realize you could set the sysid from the SDK side, thanks for that reference. I ended up commenting out the `return` linked above to get the sim...

@julianoes Update: it turns out I was wrong, even the real drone was rejecting the manual input commands; it just so happened to work because the system had a built...

Another update: can confirm, changing the MAVSDK-Java - Server .cpp nativeLib to use `mavsdk_server_run_with_mavlink_ids` and sending `255` and `190` for system and component ID respectively also worked.

@julianoes Hmm...I'm not sure, what would the impact be of just changing the hardcoded DEFAULT GCS ID to 255 in the SDK, would that break compatibility with any existing drones...

@julianoes That's great to know; so if the purpose of bringing in the SDK is **replacing** QGC entirely, it would be safe / compatible to use the 255 ID with...

> System IDs can be selected arbitrarily, so ArduPilot should not be make any hard-coded assumptions, in my opinion. We could probably file a bug against ArduPilot to have them...

@julianoes Nice find! Though if we set that, it would break the aircraft's compatibility with QGC right? (should the user choose to switch over to using QGC)

Hmm...I think the best solution here might be to expose another Java API parameter that lets clients customize the system ID then

@julianoes Done https://github.com/mavlink/MAVSDK-Java/pull/191

> It is interesting that the build happening inside a docker container fails on the M2 🤔. > > Do you know why that would be? What is this "Bad...