 | | RE: Scout vs RIS and reverse engineering and Byte Codes
|
|
Mike Kory Wrote: (...) Cool! (...) Could you eat more turkey and find the 0x52 opcode that unlocks firmware? This would let us make custom firmware for the Scout. I'm still justifying the need for a Scout :-) Cheers, Ralph Hempel - P.Eng ---...--- (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Scout vs RIS and reverse engineering and Byte Codes
|
|
Does the Scout have firmware? I'm not aware of any being downloaded to the brick. Mike Ralph Hempel <rhempel@bmts.com> wrote in message news:000201bf3858$7f...@pro150... (...) me (...) This (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | RE: Scout vs RIS and reverse engineering and Byte Codes
|
|
(...) I'm just guessing. If it has the upload data opcode, why not unlock firmware? On the RCX, there needed to be a specical code "Do you byte...etc" to allow the firmware to be "unlocked" and executed from 0x8000 hex. Now, the trick was to monitor (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Scout vs RIS and reverse engineering and Byte Codes
|
|
(...) The Scout must have control programming somewhere. What interests me is that out of 1K of RAM only about 400 bytes is available to hold a user program. Could the control program be held (preloaded) in the remaining 624 bytes of RAM? Robert (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
| |
| | Re: Scout vs RIS and reverse engineering and Byte Codes
|
|
The pollm command lets you look at memory from 0x40 to 0x440 (1 K). The unused memory does not look like code. It looks like the system attributes are available there--probably battery level and such. Also variables must be there. We have 10 globals (...) (25 years ago, 26-Nov-99, to lugnet.robotics)
|
