26 Jun
1997
26 Jun
'97
11:09 a.m.
Sam and William:
Here's what I think so far (which isn't much <g>):
1. Record format: open (depending on software for EPROM programmer);
S-records, Intel Hex, binary.
2. Submission & storage: UUEncoded image file e-mailed to "repository";
ROM/EPROM chips sent by snail mail and returned. All submissions should have
as much info about the source computer as possible (board revisions, date of
mnaufacture, etc.)
3. Requests & withdrawls: by e-mail to those with programmers; by mail for
those supplying their own chips; e-mail request with no chip sent.
4. Cost: nominal (cost of postage and EPROM).
How does this sound so far??
------------------------
Rich Cini/WUGNET
- ClubWin Charter Member (6)
- MCPS Windows 95/Networking
------------------------------
What format would these images be? S-records?
William Donzelli
william(a)ans.net
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:40:52 -0700 (PDT)
From: Sam Ismail <dastar(a)crl.com>
To: classiccmp(a)u.washington.edu
Subject: Re: Computer Documentation
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.970625103943.740O-100000(a)crl2.crl.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
On Wed, 25 Jun 1997, Richard A. Cini, Jr. wrote:
As far as ROMs are concerned, maybe we can start a
"ROM Archive"
database/repository. Members with EPROM programmers could make copies of
known-good ROMS from various machines at the request of other members.
Good idea. I think someone's thrown this out before. Anyone want to
volunteer to coordinate?
As far as Copyright concerns, I don't think that
there are any. First, many
of our target companies are out of business. Second,
we are not selling
these
chips (and the software contained therein) in a
commercial sense. Third,
they're being used as a one-for-one replacement for defective firmware. I
view
it like a diskette: I own Norton Utilities with a bad
disk 1. My friend also
owns Norton Utilities, and he makes me a copy of his
disk 1. Both of us have
valid software licenses because we both bought the
program. It's like
preservation of matter.
Let's put it this way: if you don't tell anyone, I won't.
Sam
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
-
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer,
Jackass
27 Jun
27 Jun
9:37 a.m.
On Thu, 26 Jun 1997, Richard A. Cini, Jr. wrote:
Here's what I think so far (which isn't much
<g>):
1. Record format: open (depending on software for EPROM programmer);
S-records, Intel Hex, binary.
I'm no expert at this so I'll defer.
2. Submission & storage: UUEncoded image file
e-mailed to "repository";
ROM/EPROM chips sent by snail mail and returned. All submissions should have
as much info about the source computer as possible (board revisions, date of
mnaufacture, etc.)
Sounds good. The repository then is a "soft" repository of ROM images?
3. Requests & withdrawls: by e-mail to those with programmers; by mail for
those supplying their own chips; e-mail request with no chip sent.
I assumed since the images are merely files they could be downloaded by
anyone requesting them. Is the repository also going to have physical
EPROMS that someone can request? If so, why?
4. Cost: nominal (cost of postage and EPROM).
Is the repository also going to be in the business of supplying people
with pre-burnt EPROMS? If so then 3 makes more sense now.
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
29 Jun
29 Jun
9:17 a.m.
1. Record format: open (depending on software for
EPROM programmer);
S-records, Intel Hex, binary.
I suppose just about anything is good, as there are plenty of utilities
to convert the different formats.
2. Submission & storage: UUEncoded image file
e-mailed to "repository";
ROM/EPROM chips sent by snail mail and returned. All submissions should have
as much info about the source computer as possible (board revisions, date of
mnaufacture, etc.)
I think that anything doing with the chips (purchasing, programming,
shipping) should be left to the person that needs them. Sure, not very
many people on the list have programmers, but there are enough kind souls
that would do the programming. Anyway, having a policy concerning
shipping and supply may turn into a big headache.
3. Requests & withdrawls: by e-mail to those with
programmers; by mail for
those supplying their own chips; e-mail request with no chip sent.
See above.
4. Cost: nominal (cost of postage and EPROM).
Doing any more may actually be legally shakey.
Additional thought...
How will additional required information be tied to the ROM images (as in
manufacturers part numbers, revision levels, serial numbers,
corresponding hardware information, etc.)? ROMS (and PALs) often change
as the circuits get minor "improvements" (ECOs).
William Donzelli
william(a)ans.net
11:37 a.m.
On Sun, 29 Jun 1997, William Donzelli wrote:
Additional thought...
How will additional required information be tied to the ROM images (as in
manufacturers part numbers, revision levels, serial numbers,
corresponding hardware information, etc.)? ROMS (and PALs) often change
as the circuits get minor "improvements" (ECOs).
I guess a data sheet will have to be kept for each ROM. And if a certain
revision is found not to work on a certain other revision then it will be
noted in the data sheet. It will all be figured out over time.
Sam
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Computer Historian, Programmer, Musician, Philosopher, Athlete, Writer, Jackass
9802
days inactive
9805
days old
3 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
dastar＠crl.com -
rcini＠msn.com -
william＠ans.net