|
Rockbox mail archiveSubject: Re: Neo35 car playerRe: Neo35 car player
From: BlueChip <cs_bluechip_at_webtribe.net>
Date: Mon, 19 Apr 2004 09:17:06 +0100 At 08:52 19/04/04, you wrote: >On Mon, 19 Apr 2004, tim vogt wrote: > > > Do any of the Rockbox core crew know when OpenNeo took their starting > > snapshot of Rockbox? > >Quite a long time ago (I think you could ask them, or possibly attempt to >figure it out by reading the Open Neo sources/changelog). We've seen diverted >quite a lot. I personally think the Open Neo guys actually on purpose changed >the code to divert more than they had to since a lot of therir changes merely >changed comments from /* to //, modified white-spaces and similar no-ops. LOL - I knew kids who used to do that at school - thinking that because they didn't understand C, then therefore the teachers wouldn't either :) >They did however extend the ATA code to work with the bigger disks the Neo >players often have. We have not incorporated those changes. I guess it will be of no use to us until laptop drives get bigger. >After their fork, we've done HUGE changes to Rockbox, the mp3 code restructure >perhaps being the one with the biggest impact. Today, I don't think you can do >many patches on any "side" that would apply cleanly on the other. > >We know that the Open Neo guys track our patches closely since they get/apply >most of our core bug fixes, and while they now actually provide a cvs commit >mailing list, hardly anything ever is committed in that CVS so we are >prohibited to do the same. That's why I think they still benefit from us, >without ever contributing anything back. I've mentioned this numerous times to >them, but they just think I'm a whiner. Which is true too. I also think it is disrespectful when people use your code without credit ...I too am considered a whiner. Maybe if you changed your name they would offer you more respect? <sorry, couldn't resist that ;)> > > If someone (e.g., me) were to attempt to port Rockbox to the Neo35, > would it > > make sense to look at the diffs between the Rockbox version they started > > with and OpenNeo, and then try to merge the relevant diffs into the current > > version of Rockbox? Or is that too simplistic? > >Since we already have support for Neo in the build environment, the first >thing you'd do would be to make the development work for Neo35. > >This actually builds a version for Neo35 already today, but it won't work! > >You should focus on the very early startup code next. I know the Neo guys had >to do some stuff to make the Neo startup that we don't do on the Archos, and >walking through the startup of the Open Neo code and make sure that Rockbox >does the same for Neo would be basicly what is require to make Rockbox boot on >Neo. > >Once it boots, it'll be a lot easier to continue working. Then you'd basicly >make sure that all code is made to work with 4 lines of text etc. Yes I guess the keyboard and buttons will be the most significant difference. Would it be fair to say that all Rockbox does is: # init chips # read hdd # read buttons # write to display # write to MAS ..If so you should be able to quickly identify where most of the problem may lie :) I note from the photos that NEO has the 3507 (player) chip (*NOT* the 3587 (recorder) chip.) Given only 256K of memory, you may want to forget or tweak plugins not to steal 32K of it - most plugins will be useless anyway! The great thing is a socketed ROM - so no risk of killing the unit :) _______________________________________________ http://cool.haxx.se/mailman/listinfo/rockbox Received on 2004-04-19 Page template was last modified "Tue Sep 7 00:00:02 2021" The Rockbox Crew -- Privacy Policy |