Sunrise ATA-IDE BIOS improvement?

Página 3/4
1 | 2 | | 4

Por jpgrobler

Master (154)

Imagen del jpgrobler

14-03-2003, 09:36

HI

1> SORRY for using the word 'HACK' would not do it again. It was not intended negatively. I know Leo is simply trying to get the interface working on his msx1.
2> I am very impressed with my sunrise interface and congratulate them with their work and efforts.

Maybe it's the smartest to have a small group of people look into the code. I know people like GuyveR and Grauw don't have the time to do it all, but I also know they both have quite some impressive optimization tricks up their sleeves. I have seen them at work, and it's amazing what extra speed they can squeeze out of an already impressive sourcecode.

I love this idea and would support it any way I can.

PS I am not a good coder, but a (lazy) user that wants things as easy as possible.

Thanks for everyone supporting msx!!

JP

Por BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

Imagen del BiFi

14-03-2003, 12:55

It seems my post came out a bit negative in the end. It wasn't intended to be. I do understand Sunrise's point of view very well. I also understand that Padial doesn't want to do harm with hacking it to enable it to run on MSX1.

That's why I recommended to work with the main group involved to implement things (like support for MSX1 in this case). They just want to be sure it all works well. That way they can support it. When other people are going to change things, release it and that version doesn't work anymore, Sunrise will be asked for support. They can do two things:

1. deny support (won't be really customer friendly, but they just don't support versions they haven't tested and approved themselves)
2. telling people they should install a version they delivered with the interface (without MSX1 support)

When Padial is going to release that version himself, he should:

1. maintain updating whenever new versions of the official are released
2. give support when it's not working the way it should

Por snout

Ascended (15184)

Imagen del snout

14-03-2003, 13:11

I think the Leo on our forums is someone else than Leonardo Padial ^_^

Anyway, uhm.. I think in an ideal situation Sunrise contacts one or two people who are to be in charge of the improved BIOS development. They are the ones who decide if adapted/optimized or even new routines are to be incorporated in a new Sunrise BIOS release. Other people can contribute to the BIOS, without releasing the BIOS themselves. Sunrise releases the one and only official Sunrise BIOS. Wow, it sounds close to opensource Tongue

Por sunrise

Paragon (1091)

Imagen del sunrise

14-03-2003, 13:34

Bifi I think your first remarks were better than the second part.
You gave the only right definition about the hacking.
We never denied support , it was/is always been clear since DOS2 is inside that it is meant for MSX-2 or higher. Leo is probably leonardo valencia from france.
Padial has absolute no knowledge of software.That does Daniel Zorita for him
If it is possible to use under MSX-1, why should we deny it.More people interested in the ide can have influence of people who return to MSX, thinking of buying msx-2(second hand), more demand, more knowledge and more programmers.

What I do is as follows.
People who are interested to help give an email with the improvement they want to ake care of (including leo)
I will take care of the fact to ask Okei for the FDE-emulation.
And furthermore control the situation as regards the spreading around the sourcecode to a limited group of people with permission of Jon/Okei and the board of Sunrise.
If Jon doesnot want to give the sourcecode and does want to anything than a new situation arises. Yeh snout than we can perhaps think of Open source, but NOT EARLIER

Please send your name, subject that you want to do for the new bios
to sunhisan@euronet. nl

Waiting your realistic interest to help

Por BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

Imagen del BiFi

14-03-2003, 14:04

Leo is probably leonardo valencia from france.
Padial has absolute no knowledge of software.That does Daniel Zorita for him

I didn't know that. Thanks for clearing that up.

If it is possible to use under MSX-1, why should we deny it.More people interested in the ide can have influence of people who return to MSX, thinking of buying msx-2(second hand), more demand, more knowledge and more programmers.
The deny part was more to the point you took in a previous post regarding your name in the 'hacked' version and when that doesn't work you would be contacted because of that.

Por Leo

Paragon (1236)

Imagen del Leo

15-03-2003, 09:02

Hello,

I want just to say what has led me to think about getting MSX1 interface:

- 2years back, I had only an MSX1 and I was looking for ataching an IDE.
- I read many pages on GIDE project with aimed to attch an IDE drive
to a 8bit uP through the 8255 circuit.
- Then I read Novatec page that described a circuit a bit different, and
downloaded the source code of th bios.
- Then I read and understood some part of this bios and realized that
it was not matching the hardware that was described but better GIDE
style interface. I asked to Igor , and he confirmed it was a mistake in
the html page.
- Later on I gave up and bought an MSX2 and SUNRISE IDE, and it works great.
(I use conventional FAT12)

- the idea i try to develop is now : change the low level routines of Igor's bios
to make them compatible to SUNRISE style IO adressing.
---> OF COURSE I WILL NEVER DISTRIBUTE ANYTHING WITHOUT ASKING BEFORE
TO IGOR AND GIVING CLEAR CREDITS TO ITS WORK since i changed only 0,5%
of its own original job. ( I if I ever got something working ...)

- the status is : At the starting I got the wrong geometry size of the IDE.
I dont know if it is due to CHS -LBA description.
My ide is regocnized as LBA is SUNRISE BIOS , but igor's works
only with CHS i think.
But the drive seems to seek well.
I dont do lots of trials since I run them on my *golden* msx HD...

- I think there are many and many MSX1 not used since you can play only catridges.
You cannot develop and save ( except on casette ... )
- I think it can be interesting for sunrise to increase the size of their market to MSX1
also , they could sell more interface. Well it is not up to me adivice SUNRISE, they
are doing good but i just give them point of view.

Por BiFi

Enlighted (4348)

Imagen del BiFi

15-03-2003, 09:19

Hello Leo,

Thank you for clearing it up. It makes much more sense now. I do advise to cooperate with Sunrise on this development as you have a point there that MSX1 support for the IDE interface may turn out very useful.

I agree with you it was hard to develop something for MSX1 in te beginning due to tape issues. Fortunately, later external floppy drive interfaces with drives were developed and sold to enhance development speed.

A small side effect to harddisk usage in general is the partition sizes are quite large compared to the smaller sizes of files on MSX and to make an effective order in the chaos a directory structure is very useful and therefore MSX-DOS 2 is required. This system requires a memory mapped ram system to function properly and in most cases MSX1 has no support for memory mapped ram whatsoever, meaning the initial mapper blocks aren't set up the way MSX2 and later does.

Recently I've heard about a DOS2 kernel which is modified so it will not require a memory mapped ram system anymore so it may enable use of DOS2 on MSX1 systems.

Por Leo

Paragon (1236)

Imagen del Leo

15-03-2003, 11:44

Really ?

I thought also that changing DOS2 could be more convienient but its seemed more
complicated.
I heard about a modified DOS2 that uses megaram instead of mapper.

But: I put a 512K mapper + sunrise ide interface on an MSX1 and nothing happended.
Maybe in the MSX2 bios there is an init routine for mapper that is not in msx1, even
on msx2 that dont have mappers.

I heard baout also some msxdos 1.8 or other OS that could have sub-dirs , not sure ...

So a DOS2 ROM + SYS not using at all mapper could be interesting ....

Por anonymous

incognito ergo sum (116)

Imagen del anonymous

15-03-2003, 15:00

This system requires a memory mapped ram system to function properly and in most cases MSX1 has no support for memory mapped ram whatsoever, meaning the initial mapper blocks aren't set up the way MSX2 and later does.
I hear Padial's latest mappers auto-initialize to MSX2 defaults, so they can be used in MSX1 without problems!

Por Algorythms

Champion (287)

Imagen del Algorythms

15-03-2003, 15:05

Oi!

There is a dos 1.xx-clone made by a russian that supports directories. Don`t remember the name, though, but it works on MSX 1.

-Dan Derpaux / www.algorythms.com

Página 3/4
1 | 2 | | 4