Hicks, Jamey writes on 20 August 2001:
> Alan,
> btw, the FFFFFFFF results indicate your bootldr was erased.
glad it did that bit ok :-).
> Try reloading the bootldr again, but do not use the pflash command.
Although minicom seems to be sending it (lots of NAK warnings) the
ipaq end doesn't seem to be getting anything, after sending (which
fails with a no ACK or EOT message), if I simpl press return I
get help as it it had received a garbage command
I vaguely remember having this problem with this particular ipaq
last year (we have a few now and just bought more). I did wonder
if minicom was a reasonable terminal emulator for this and wondered
if there was a better one. Its still switched on and I'll keep
it that way. Any suggestions?
thanks
Alan
> Jamey
>
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Alan W Black [mailto:awb_at_cs.cmu.edu]
> > Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 6:08 AM
> > To: Hicks, Jamey
> > Cc: Alan W Black; familiar_at_handhelds.org
> > Subject: Re: [Familiar] load bootldr weirdness
> >
> >
> >
> > Jamey Hicks writes on 19 August 2001:
> > >
> > > Bootldr 2.9.0 does not protect/unprotect flash correctly.
> > >
> > > Check what is actually in flash:
> > > peek flash 0x20
> > > peek flash 0x24
> > >
> > boot> peek flash 0x20
> > addr = 00000020
> > value = FFFFFFFF
> > boot> peek flash 0x24
> > addr = 00000024
> > value = FFFFFFFF
> >
> > > Do not reset it or powercycle it until we figure out what
> > state it is in.
> >
> > OK
> >
> > Alan
> >
> >
> > > Jamey
> > >
> > >
> > > Alan W Black wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I have an old version of Linux on my ipaq nad am in
> > > > the process of upgrading to familiar 0.4. I actually installed
> > > > two machines last year (around October).
> > > >
> > > > I actually have
> > > >
> > > > >> Compaq OHH BootLoader, Rev 02.09.00
> > > > >> 00-08-15_23:13
> > > > >> ARM Processor Rev=6901B116
> > > > >> CPSR=600000D3
> > > > >> (c) 2000 Compaq Cambridge Research Laboratory
> > > >
> > > > I'm therefore trying to upgrade the bootloader to
> > > > bootldr-0000-2.14.5-bigkernel-mono
> > > >
> > > > I'm using minicom from a RH6.2 laptop (which I used
> > before). When
> > > > I tried (the first time)
> > > > boot> load bootldr
> > > >
> > > > boot> load bootldr
> > > >
> > > > loading flash region bootldr
> > > >
> > > > using xmodem
> > > > ready for xmodem download..
> > > >
> > > > writing flash..
> > > > addr: 00000000 data: EA00008E
> > > > addr: 00010000 data: E1A0C00D
> > > > verifying ... done.
> > > > boot> .........RXSTAT error: 00000020
> > > >
> > > > So no "erasing flash" but a writing and verify. For the
> > next steps I
> > > > did
> > > >
> > > > boot> pflash 0 0xffff 1
> > > >
> > > > addr=00000000
> > > >
> > > > len=0000FFFF
> > > >
> > > > protect=00000001
> > > >
> > > > Protecting sector 00000000
> > > >
> > > > boot> qflash 2
> > > >
> > > > value = 00000000
> > > >
> > > > Not the right answer.
> > > >
> > > > I did get a xmodem timeout before I sent the first time.
> > > >
> > > > As I got an error downloading (I remembered from last
> > year I had to do
> > > > the dowload quickly before the timeout (and mybe before
> > minicom (or
> > > > the booter) printed "."'s. So I tried the xmodem
> > transfer again. I
> > > > again got many "Retry 0: NAK on sector"(though I do it
> > quickly I only
> > > > get these occasionally). And I always get transfer
> > failed, and no ACK
> > > > or EOT errors from minicom, and the boot loader seems to
> > seem noting
> > > > being transfered.
> > > >
> > > > Do I need to unprotect the flash, to send again? Do I
> > need to use
> > > > a diffrent terminal emulator? (I don't have access to windows
> > > > anywhere).
> > > >
> > > > (I've left the machine on and will leave it like that).
> > > >
> > > > thanks
> > > >
> > > > Alan
> > > >
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > Familiar mailing list
> > > > Familiar_at_handhelds.org
> > > > http://handhelds.org/mailman/listinfo/familiar
> > > > irc://irc.openprojects.net #familiar
> >
Received on Mon Aug 20 2001 - 05:14:26 EDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jul 25 2005 - 17:12:33 EDT