I come from DC 8.51 and trying DC 9.21.
I get that errors when i try to compile to flash or trying to resest the
board.
line 1 : WARNING ERROR : No parameters found for flash id
received from pilot bios - using default parameters.
line 33 : WARNING BOARDTYPES.LIB : No ID Block found on the target;
defining _BOARD_TYPE_ to be a BL1810.
I see in the downlaod dialog a bad id for my boards:
RCM2100 : Board 0x0314
RCM2110 : Board 0x0414
The same boards work excelent with DC 8.51 , same machine, all the same
except DC version. I switch from one version to another and stop working.
Im using a USB to serial adapter from Keyspan (19W) and ever work
excellent at 4xx KBPS.
Any idea?
German.
Errors in DC9.21
Started by ●May 19, 2005
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
Just to add to the fire about DC versions, I have whole program that was built in DC 7.21 but when I try to compile and run it in DC 9, the program gets stuck in a loop in the first function.
Ryan
From:
r...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:r...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of German Gentile
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 10:58
AM
To: r...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [rabbit-semi] Errors in
DC9.21
I come from DC 8.51 and trying DC 9.21.
I get that errors when i try to compile to flash
or trying to resest the
board.
line 1 : WARNING
ERROR : No parameters found for flash
id
received from pilot bios - using default
parameters.
line 33 : WARNING
BOARDTYPES.LIB : No ID Block found on the target;
defining _BOARD_TYPE_ to be a
BL1810.
I see in the downlaod dialog a bad id for my
boards:
RCM2100 : Board 0x0314
RCM2110 : Board 0x0414
The same boards work excelent with DC 8.51 , same
machine, all the same
except DC version. I switch from one version to
another and stop working.
Im using a USB to serial adapter from Keyspan
(19W) and ever work
excellent at 4xx KBPS.
Any idea?
German.
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
Not to high jack your post…
I have 9.10 DC 7.21 and 7.10
7.10 and 7.21 never had a problem going back and forth.
It’s just funny because it’s just a page of text and the loop is just looking t thru a serial buffer.
Ryan
From:
r...@yahoogroups.com [mailto:r...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Scott Henion
Sent: Thursday, May 19, 2005 1:35
PM
To: r...@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [rabbit-semi] Errors
in DC9.21
At 01:23 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
Just to add to the fire about DC versions,
I have whole program that was built in DC 7.21 but when I try to compile and
run it in DC 9, the program gets stuck in a loop in the first function.
Ryan
I have found most progs do not work in 9.21. The ID block stuff is a real pain
and seems to screw up. Add to that, ZW does not have a utility to recover the V5
ID block that 9.x wants to use.
One of the reasons I stick with 7.33. 8.6 seems ok, 9.10 seemed to work with a
few problems.
| Scott G. Henion| s...@shdesigns.org |
| Consultant | Stone Mountain, GA |
| SHDesigns | PGP Key 0xE98DDC48 |
| http://www.shdesigns.org/rabbit/ |
------
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
At 01:23 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
I have found most progs do not work in 9.21. The ID block stuff is a real pain and seems to screw up. Add to that, ZW does not have a utility to recover the V5 ID block that 9.x wants to use.
One of the reasons I stick with 7.33. 8.6 seems ok, 9.10 seemed to work with a few problems.
------
| Scott G. Henion| s...@shdesigns.org |
| Consultant | Stone Mountain, GA |
| SHDesigns | PGP Key 0xE98DDC48 |
| http://www.shdesigns.org/rabbit/ |
------
Just to add to the fire about DC versions, I have whole program that was built in DC 7.21 but when I try to compile and run it in DC 9, the program gets stuck in a loop in the first function.
Ryan
I have found most progs do not work in 9.21. The ID block stuff is a real pain and seems to screw up. Add to that, ZW does not have a utility to recover the V5 ID block that 9.x wants to use.
One of the reasons I stick with 7.33. 8.6 seems ok, 9.10 seemed to work with a few problems.
------
| Scott G. Henion| s...@shdesigns.org |
| Consultant | Stone Mountain, GA |
| SHDesigns | PGP Key 0xE98DDC48 |
| http://www.shdesigns.org/rabbit/ |
------
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
Scott Henion escribi
> At 01:23 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>
>> Just to add to the fire about DC versions, I have whole program that
>> was built in DC 7.21 but when I try to compile and run it in DC 9,
>> the program gets stuck in a loop in the first function.
>>
>> Ryan > I have found most progs do not work in 9.21. The ID block stuff is a
> real pain and seems to screw up. Add to that, ZW does not have a
> utility to recover the V5 ID block that 9.x wants to use.
>
> One of the reasons I stick with 7.33. 8.6 seems ok, 9.10 seemed to
> work with a few problems.
>
I only want to use DC9.xx to get a better IDE, but i see it have only a
few new features.
I think better stay with 85. Yu say 8.6 is better? I remeber somebody
complain about 8.6, but cant remember why.
German
> At 01:23 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>
>> Just to add to the fire about DC versions, I have whole program that
>> was built in DC 7.21 but when I try to compile and run it in DC 9,
>> the program gets stuck in a loop in the first function.
>>
>> Ryan > I have found most progs do not work in 9.21. The ID block stuff is a
> real pain and seems to screw up. Add to that, ZW does not have a
> utility to recover the V5 ID block that 9.x wants to use.
>
> One of the reasons I stick with 7.33. 8.6 seems ok, 9.10 seemed to
> work with a few problems.
>
I only want to use DC9.xx to get a better IDE, but i see it have only a
few new features.
I think better stay with 85. Yu say 8.6 is better? I remeber somebody
complain about 8.6, but cant remember why.
German
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
Sorry for the inconvenience, we have just recently identified this annoying
problem and found a work around.
If you're carrying forward a Dynamic C project (DCP) file from DC 8.51 to
9.21, you will encounter problems due to a change in the pilot BIOS that is
necessary to support the PowerCore FLEX's version 5 ID block.
This problem can be resolved by making a copy of your project file (maybe
append "921" at the end of the file name) and then editing (with Dynamic C
closed) the pathlists for the coldload.bin and pilot.bin files to suit your
DC 9.21 installation.
- Bruce
At 09:58 AM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>I come from DC 8.51 and trying DC 9.21.
>
>I get that errors when i try to compile to flash or trying to resest the
>board.
>
>line 1 : WARNING ERROR : No parameters found for flash id
>received from pilot bios - using default parameters.
>line 33 : WARNING BOARDTYPES.LIB : No ID Block found on the target;
>defining _BOARD_TYPE_ to be a BL1810.
>
>I see in the downlaod dialog a bad id for my boards:
>
>RCM2100 : Board 0x0314
>RCM2110 : Board 0x0414
>
>The same boards work excelent with DC 8.51 , same machine, all the same
>except DC version. I switch from one version to another and stop working.
>Im using a USB to serial adapter from Keyspan (19W) and ever work
>excellent at 4xx KBPS.
>Any idea?
>
>German. >
>Yahoo! Groups Links >
>
problem and found a work around.
If you're carrying forward a Dynamic C project (DCP) file from DC 8.51 to
9.21, you will encounter problems due to a change in the pilot BIOS that is
necessary to support the PowerCore FLEX's version 5 ID block.
This problem can be resolved by making a copy of your project file (maybe
append "921" at the end of the file name) and then editing (with Dynamic C
closed) the pathlists for the coldload.bin and pilot.bin files to suit your
DC 9.21 installation.
- Bruce
At 09:58 AM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>I come from DC 8.51 and trying DC 9.21.
>
>I get that errors when i try to compile to flash or trying to resest the
>board.
>
>line 1 : WARNING ERROR : No parameters found for flash id
>received from pilot bios - using default parameters.
>line 33 : WARNING BOARDTYPES.LIB : No ID Block found on the target;
>defining _BOARD_TYPE_ to be a BL1810.
>
>I see in the downlaod dialog a bad id for my boards:
>
>RCM2100 : Board 0x0314
>RCM2110 : Board 0x0414
>
>The same boards work excelent with DC 8.51 , same machine, all the same
>except DC version. I switch from one version to another and stop working.
>Im using a USB to serial adapter from Keyspan (19W) and ever work
>excellent at 4xx KBPS.
>Any idea?
>
>German. >
>Yahoo! Groups Links >
>
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
And what about a utility to recover the V5 ID block that DC9.x expects?
Is there any news?
Enzo
____________________
Enzo Gomez, EE
enzogomez@enzo...
Is there any news?
Enzo
____________________
Enzo Gomez, EE
enzogomez@enzo...
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
Dynamic C 9.20 is the first release that "knows" about version 5
ID blocks,
and the version 5 ID block is only factory-installed on Z-World's PowerCore
FLEX boards so far. Previous versions of the ID block are still fully
supported by DC 9.2x.
What issues are you seeing that make you think DC 9.2x somehow expects the
version 5 ID block? Do you have PowerCore FLEX boards with corrupted
version 5 ID blocks that need to be recovered or re-written? If so,
Z-World Tech Support (or I) can supply a version of the write_idblock.c
utility that will write a suitable version 5 ID block. If this is the
case, how did the ID block corruption occur, and is it reproducible?
If it is the previously mentioned pilot BIOS issue that you ask about, then
the problem is that the old pilot BIOS doesn't deliver the exact
information that the new DC 9.2x versions expect / require. This problem
shows up when an older pilot.bin file is used by the new DC 9.2x, as will
happen when a older DCP file is migrated to the new DC 9.2x version.
If there is some other issue, then please explain it in more detail.
Thanks,
Bruce
At 04:40 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>And what about a utility to recover the V5 ID block that DC9.x expects?
>Is there any news?
>
>Enzo
>____________________
>Enzo Gomez, EE
>enzogomez@enzo... >
>Yahoo! Groups Links >
>
and the version 5 ID block is only factory-installed on Z-World's PowerCore
FLEX boards so far. Previous versions of the ID block are still fully
supported by DC 9.2x.
What issues are you seeing that make you think DC 9.2x somehow expects the
version 5 ID block? Do you have PowerCore FLEX boards with corrupted
version 5 ID blocks that need to be recovered or re-written? If so,
Z-World Tech Support (or I) can supply a version of the write_idblock.c
utility that will write a suitable version 5 ID block. If this is the
case, how did the ID block corruption occur, and is it reproducible?
If it is the previously mentioned pilot BIOS issue that you ask about, then
the problem is that the old pilot BIOS doesn't deliver the exact
information that the new DC 9.2x versions expect / require. This problem
shows up when an older pilot.bin file is used by the new DC 9.2x, as will
happen when a older DCP file is migrated to the new DC 9.2x version.
If there is some other issue, then please explain it in more detail.
Thanks,
Bruce
At 04:40 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>And what about a utility to recover the V5 ID block that DC9.x expects?
>Is there any news?
>
>Enzo
>____________________
>Enzo Gomez, EE
>enzogomez@enzo... >
>Yahoo! Groups Links >
>
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
Bruce Isted escribi
>Sorry for the inconvenience, we have just recently identified this annoying
>problem and found a work around.
>
>If you're carrying forward a Dynamic C project (DCP) file from DC 8.51 to
>9.21, you will encounter problems due to a change in the pilot BIOS that is
>necessary to support the PowerCore FLEX's version 5 ID block.
>
>This problem can be resolved by making a copy of your project file (maybe
>append "921" at the end of the file name) and then editing (with Dynamic C
>closed) the pathlists for the coldload.bin and pilot.bin files to suit your
>DC 9.21 installation. >
Thank you Bruce, i will give a try.
German.
>Sorry for the inconvenience, we have just recently identified this annoying
>problem and found a work around.
>
>If you're carrying forward a Dynamic C project (DCP) file from DC 8.51 to
>9.21, you will encounter problems due to a change in the pilot BIOS that is
>necessary to support the PowerCore FLEX's version 5 ID block.
>
>This problem can be resolved by making a copy of your project file (maybe
>append "921" at the end of the file name) and then editing (with Dynamic C
>closed) the pathlists for the coldload.bin and pilot.bin files to suit your
>DC 9.21 installation. >
Thank you Bruce, i will give a try.
German.
Reply by ●May 19, 20052005-05-19
At 07:22 PM 5/19/2005, you wrote:
>Dynamic C 9.20 is the first release that "knows" about version 5 ID blocks,
>and the version 5 ID block is only factory-installed on Z-World's PowerCore
>FLEX boards so far. Previous versions of the ID block are still fully
>supported by DC 9.2x.
>
>What issues are you seeing that make you think DC 9.2x somehow expects the
>version 5 ID block?
I did not say it expects it, I said it creates one.
> Do you have PowerCore FLEX boards with corrupted
>version 5 ID blocks that need to be recovered or re-written? If so,
>Z-World Tech Support (or I) can supply a version of the write_idblock.c
>utility that will write a suitable version 5 ID block. If this is the
>case, how did the ID block corruption occur, and is it reproducible?
I don't have the powerflex board (although I was told I'd get one.)
It is not just corruption. My DLM is written in Softools so it needs to
convert the ID block to ST format (in RAM so it knows how to skip the
user/id block areas.) Users reported problems with 8.x. This seems to be a
change in how the User block is handled. Before there was 2 user blocks
that share one ID block (v3). The new mirrored scheme makes 2 ID blocks,
one is marked invalid (v4?). The code was changed to search for the ID
block. Its fixed the problems.
Then users reported additional problems on 3700/3300 boards when using DC
9.x. It was found that the ID block format has suddenly changed. I added
decoding of the V5 ID block and that fixed the problems.
>If it is the previously mentioned pilot BIOS issue that you ask about, then
>the problem is that the old pilot BIOS doesn't deliver the exact
>information that the new DC 9.2x versions expect / require. This problem
>shows up when an older pilot.bin file is used by the new DC 9.2x, as will
>happen when a older DCP file is migrated to the new DC 9.2x version.
I was talking about a .c file with no project. I have seen garbage code,
TCP/IP stack bugs, DHCP issues, and the code size was too big for projects
that used to easily fit in flash. After trying several .c files and seeing
different bugs in the code generated, I gave up. I do little work in DC, I
use 7.33 as it is stable and supports all the modules (with a little rework.)
I would like a utility to generate a V5 ID block, although I could write
one. Might be useful for testing.
BTW, I consider tha V5 ID block a bad idea. It is set up to be rewritten
according to compile settings. I consider the ID block should be left
alone. I have had users report it getting corrupted when using 9.x.
<Scott>
------------
| Scott G. Henion | shenion@shen... |
| Consultant | Stone Mountain, GA |
| SHDesigns | PGP Key 0xE98DDC48 |
|Rabbit Libs: http://www.shdesigns.org/rabbit/ |
------------ --
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005
>Dynamic C 9.20 is the first release that "knows" about version 5 ID blocks,
>and the version 5 ID block is only factory-installed on Z-World's PowerCore
>FLEX boards so far. Previous versions of the ID block are still fully
>supported by DC 9.2x.
>
>What issues are you seeing that make you think DC 9.2x somehow expects the
>version 5 ID block?
I did not say it expects it, I said it creates one.
> Do you have PowerCore FLEX boards with corrupted
>version 5 ID blocks that need to be recovered or re-written? If so,
>Z-World Tech Support (or I) can supply a version of the write_idblock.c
>utility that will write a suitable version 5 ID block. If this is the
>case, how did the ID block corruption occur, and is it reproducible?
I don't have the powerflex board (although I was told I'd get one.)
It is not just corruption. My DLM is written in Softools so it needs to
convert the ID block to ST format (in RAM so it knows how to skip the
user/id block areas.) Users reported problems with 8.x. This seems to be a
change in how the User block is handled. Before there was 2 user blocks
that share one ID block (v3). The new mirrored scheme makes 2 ID blocks,
one is marked invalid (v4?). The code was changed to search for the ID
block. Its fixed the problems.
Then users reported additional problems on 3700/3300 boards when using DC
9.x. It was found that the ID block format has suddenly changed. I added
decoding of the V5 ID block and that fixed the problems.
>If it is the previously mentioned pilot BIOS issue that you ask about, then
>the problem is that the old pilot BIOS doesn't deliver the exact
>information that the new DC 9.2x versions expect / require. This problem
>shows up when an older pilot.bin file is used by the new DC 9.2x, as will
>happen when a older DCP file is migrated to the new DC 9.2x version.
I was talking about a .c file with no project. I have seen garbage code,
TCP/IP stack bugs, DHCP issues, and the code size was too big for projects
that used to easily fit in flash. After trying several .c files and seeing
different bugs in the code generated, I gave up. I do little work in DC, I
use 7.33 as it is stable and supports all the modules (with a little rework.)
I would like a utility to generate a V5 ID block, although I could write
one. Might be useful for testing.
BTW, I consider tha V5 ID block a bad idea. It is set up to be rewritten
according to compile settings. I consider the ID block should be left
alone. I have had users report it getting corrupted when using 9.x.
<Scott>
------------
| Scott G. Henion | shenion@shen... |
| Consultant | Stone Mountain, GA |
| SHDesigns | PGP Key 0xE98DDC48 |
|Rabbit Libs: http://www.shdesigns.org/rabbit/ |
------------ --
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.322 / Virus Database: 266.11.12 - Release Date: 5/17/2005
