RE: [OpenBIOS] New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Ralph Stickley]

SVGA may be standard, but which chip-set are you using ?

The system setup can be highly unique for each CPU (PII, PIII, Celeron,
Ultra-Low Power, etc), 
"co-processor" (440BX, 440TX, et. al.) and/or Super I/O.... 
These devices must be initialized before DRAM, PCI bus, etc will get
started, even before the Video driver is loaded.

Interested observer....

Ralph
> From: 	Gavin R. Brewer[SMTP:[e-mail]]
> Sent: 	Thursday, August 16, 2001 3:27 PM
> To: 	[e-mail]
> Subject: 	RE: [OpenBIOS] New power-up graphics BIOS.
>
> James,
>
> I would like to program in Intel generic 8088 mode, and assume an industry
> standard SVGA chip. The code is aimed to be as simple as possible.
>
> All I would like to do, is to be able to program the SVGA registers to
> move,
> and rescan pixel efficiently.
>
> This should be done in a few lines of assembler code. Things like
> Bresenham's algorithm etc, can be efficiently coded in C++, so there is no
> need to overburden ourselves.
>
> Thanx,
>    		Gavin. <|;-)
>
> PS. do you know any useful links where I can download asm snippets?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [e-mail]
> [mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of James Logan
> Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 7:04 PM
> To: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: [OpenBIOS] New power-up graphics BIOS.
>
> Gavin,
>    I would love to help. have you started? what
>    chip will you be using?
> James
>
> To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
> with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

Ralph,

I am using a reference book on the VESA SVGA standard version 1.1 as a
source of code snippets etc:

EGA/VGA: A programmer's reference guide
By Bradley Dyck Kliewer
McGraw Hill Publishers.

I know this is really retro, but if we can stick to code which is a little
way back down the evolutionary tree of hardware, we might be able to create
'instant' graphics from the BIOS.

What would be crucial is some sort of power-up self-testing function, that
determines what kind of SVGA chipset is present, (only the largest families
considered),  and applies different code for each chipset.

Clearly this would be much better hand-coded in C++ rather than assembler;
lest things get icky.

All the best,
    		Gavin.

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Ralph Stickley
Sent: Thursday, August 16, 2001 9:14 PM
To: [e-mail];
'[e-mail]'
Subject: RE: [OpenBIOS] New power-up graphics BIOS.

SVGA may be standard, but which chip-set are you using ?

The system setup can be highly unique for each CPU (PII, PIII, Celeron,
Ultra-Low Power, etc),
"co-processor" (440BX, 440TX, et. al.) and/or Super I/O....
These devices must be initialized before DRAM, PCI bus, etc will get
started, even before the Video driver is loaded.

Interested observer....

Ralph

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

Ralph,
> The system setup can be highly unique for each CPU (PII, PIII,
> Celeron, Ultra-Low Power, etc),
> "co-processor" (440BX, 440TX, et. al.) and/or Super I/O....
> These devices must be initialized before DRAM, PCI bus, etc will get
> started, even before the Video driver is loaded.

Hmm..it looks like the problem is more tangled than I thought. Could you be
a bit more specific as to what happens at bootup, from the proverbial flick
of the power switch? I need your expert input here.

btw. there is no need for any sort of annoying spam to appear on the screen
at bootup. Who wants to see it? I think the builders of conventional PC BIOS
are a little set in their ways.. (no offence if you are one of those guys
;-)

Another important question: how did the Apple-Mac folks do it?

All the best,
    		Gavin.

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Niklas Ekström]

> Another important question: how did the Apple-Mac folks do it?

Using OpenFirmware. It's not the easiest way and also not the prettiest, but
with enough work I think it might be worthwhile.

/ Niklas

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[zechmer]

Hello again Garvin,

at startup the conventional PC-BIOS searches (scans) for additional ROMs,
such as VGA-ROM.
It is then initialized. So a text startup copyright message of the VGA-card
would appear
on the screen (so does my old SPEA VEGA V7 card).
How would you overcome this "problem"?
I didn't have any ideas, because the BIOS needs int 10h for output
functions.
Int 10h will only correctly be set, if the VGA-BIOS is initialized.
Or would you prefer to program chip registers directly?
This wouldn't be very generic...

Bye for now

Bernhard

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

> At startup the conventional PC-BIOS searches (scans) for additional
> ROMs, such as VGA-ROM.

Kewl. Actually I have noticed that my Savage4 card displays stuff on the
screen before the main BIOS is activated. Interesting..
> It is then initialized. So a text startup copyright message of the
> VGA-card would appear on the screen (so does my old SPEA VEGA V7
> card).
> How would you overcome this "problem"? I didn't have any ideas,
> because the BIOS needs int 10h for output functions.

Hmm.. I propose someone port something like MacOS or Linux onto ROM first,
mainly as an improved form of BIOS.

Personally I would prefer see a port of MacOS to the Intel machine.
Basically, if we can pull this one off, we can have instant GUI bootup on an
Intel machine..think on it.
> Int 10h will only correctly be set, if the VGA-BIOS is initialized.
> Or would you prefer to program chip registers directly?
> This wouldn't be very generic...

This is the old quandary. Generic APIs have massive overheads. (Man, my head
is spinning with the number of emails I have been getting...Ommm *sigh*
relax.)

There is only one way to get around this problem. Consider merging,
integrating and simplifying the VGA-BIOS with the system ROM so that we get
an integrated bootup sequence, with no textual spam.

Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?

Thanx.
    Gavin.

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Lloyd Thomson]

If you want a starting point for a DOS-like package, you might want to take
a look at FreeDOS (www.freedos.com). Written in assembly, as is most driver
and really really efficient code.

I have not really looked at FreeDOS in depth, but know it is there, and have
downloaded it. Was actually thinking of using it for a 386ex project, but
got pulled on to another assignment before I got far enough to make an
intelligent decision.

I would also love to help, but have extremely limited time. And it is
looking like it will only get worse!!! I may be able to help with
suggestions, and problem solving, but if you want code from me, you would
have to get in line!!!

Just a comment - if you a want faster application, go with assembly. YES, I
know that C and C++ are more portable, and the newer compilers do wonders
with efficiency. I also realize that I am opening this up to a whole battery
of emails regarding the C/C++ vs. assembly battle (Please don't - take the
argument to the appropriate newsgroup, since I really don't think that this
mail list is intended for that. I am expressing an opinion here, folks :) ).
However, if the code is written in assembly, every knowledgeable person can
see exactly what the software is doing, and if that would be a problem or
not. Compilers have a tendency to hide things, as many of you well know,
such as overhead.

good luck

Lloyd Thomson
Sr. Design Engineer
One Stop Satellite Solutions
1805 University Cir
Ogden, UT 84408-1805
(USA)
801 626 7272
[e-mail]
www.osss.com

----- Original Message -----
From: "Gavin R. Brewer" 
To: 
Sent: Friday, August 17, 2001 1:35 AM
Subject: RE: [OpenBIOS] New power-up graphics BIOS.
> At startup the conventional PC-BIOS searches (scans) for additional
> ROMs, such as VGA-ROM.

Kewl. Actually I have noticed that my Savage4 card displays stuff on the
screen before the main BIOS is activated. Interesting..
> It is then initialized. So a text startup copyright message of the
> VGA-card would appear on the screen (so does my old SPEA VEGA V7
> card).
> How would you overcome this "problem"? I didn't have any ideas,
> because the BIOS needs int 10h for output functions.

Hmm.. I propose someone port something like MacOS or Linux onto ROM first,
mainly as an improved form of BIOS.

Personally I would prefer see a port of MacOS to the Intel machine.
Basically, if we can pull this one off, we can have instant GUI bootup on an
Intel machine..think on it.
> Int 10h will only correctly be set, if the VGA-BIOS is initialized.
> Or would you prefer to program chip registers directly?
> This wouldn't be very generic...

This is the old quandary. Generic APIs have massive overheads. (Man, my head
is spinning with the number of emails I have been getting...Ommm *sigh*
relax.)

There is only one way to get around this problem. Consider merging,
integrating and simplifying the VGA-BIOS with the system ROM so that we get
an integrated bootup sequence, with no textual spam.

Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?

Thanx.
Gavin.

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[zechmer]

Hello Lloyd,
> If you want a starting point for a DOS-like package, you might want to

take
> a look at FreeDOS (www.freedos.com). Written in assembly, as is most

driver
> and really really efficient code.
>
> I have not really looked at FreeDOS in depth, but know it is there, and

have
> downloaded it. Was actually thinking of using it for a 386ex project, but
> got pulled on to another assignment before I got far enough to make an
> intelligent decision.

Well I downloaded the source 2 or 3 years ago. It's a mix of mainly C and a
few ASM
segments. I couldn't say if it's efficient or not. Also some time ago the
LinuxBIOS. At this time it supported 2 chipsets.
> Just a comment - if you a want faster application, go with assembly. YES,

I
> know that C and C++ are more portable, and the newer compilers do wonders
> with efficiency. I also realize that I am opening this up to a whole

battery
> of emails regarding the C/C++ vs. assembly battle (Please don't - take the
> argument to the appropriate newsgroup, since I really don't think that

this
> mail list is intended for that. I am expressing an opinion here, folks

:) ).

You're right. If you want to compile the BIOS into a 1MBit ROM C insn't a
very
good choice. I would use a low-level ASM-API on which the whole thing is
build up.
> However, if the code is written in assembly, every knowledgeable person

can
> see exactly what the software is doing, and if that would be a problem or
> not. Compilers have a tendency to hide things, as many of you well know,
> such as overhead.

A questition to all: is the gcc capable of producing romable code?
At least he produces souce output (which dosn't integrate the source for the
libs, just CALL lib... etc.[?]).

Bye

Bernhard

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[zechmer]

Hello Garvin,
> Hmm.. I propose someone port something like MacOS or Linux onto ROM first,
> mainly as an improved form of BIOS.

I would only emphasize some very little detail of the Mac System icons:
    they are all designed to work correctly in B/W and Color mode
(you get a correct B/W display of the icons,
if you filter with 50% threshold aver the color value of 128).
So why not simply take theese [copyright?]?

An "improved" form of BIOS existed on IBM machines.
It was called ABIOS (for multitasking purpuses).
I don't know on which machines it was implemented.

My suggestion for a simple and effective(?) start (of the project) would be:
    first, to write a simple monitor.
  The monitor should have the following features:
   - to init the system (dma, irq, serial ports etc.)
    -a simple "command line" with the commands:
   "load memory", "save memory", "dump memory", "go"
the load memory option should load the graphics bios from a server
in the RAM of the client (the BIOS testing machine).
save memory is the reverse option. All other options should be clear.
Note that this "command line" option exists on some (super)computers.
Or is it better to directly use a PC Emulator (like bochs?).
Bye for now,

Bernhard

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin Robert Brewer]

zechmer wrote:
> Hello Garvin,
>
> I would only emphasize some very little detail of the Mac System icons:
>     they are all designed to work correctly in B/W and Color mode
> (you get a correct B/W display of the icons,
> if you filter with 50% threshold aver the color value of 128).
> So why not simply take theese [copyright?]?

Okay, done. d:-)
> An "improved" form of BIOS existed on IBM machines.
> It was called ABIOS (for multitasking purpuses).
> I don't know on which machines it was implemented.

Sounds interesting.
> My suggestion for a simple and effective(?) start (of the project) would be:
>     first, to write a simple monitor.
>   The monitor should have the following features:
> to init the system (dma, irq, serial ports etc.)
> -a simple "command line" with the commands:

What?!! Are we going back to the 70's? No WAY is there going to be any
command line in Eric, save what you can emulate in a window.

No offence dude, but that is right out.
> "load memory", "save memory", "dump memory", "go"

Yes, but as options in a window.
> the load memory option should load the graphics bios from a server
> in the RAM of the client (the BIOS testing machine).

Nice one, agreed. <|;-)
> save memory is the reverse option. All other options should be clear.
> Note that this "command line" option exists on some (super)computers.

Guess that's why it sux so bad d:-|
> Or is it better to directly use a PC Emulator (like bochs?).
> Bye for now,

Emulation is the way to go, buddy! d:-)

Thanx for your stimulating words, they are much appreciated.

All the best,
    	Gavin.
-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[zechmer]

Hello Gavin,
> > My suggestion for a simple and effective(?) start (of the project) would

be:
> > first, to write a simple monitor.
> >
> > The monitor should have the following features:
> > to init the system (dma, irq, serial ports etc.)
> > -a simple "command line" with the commands:
>
> What?!! Are we going back to the 70's? No WAY is there going to be any
> command line in Eric, save what you can emulate in a window.

I think we misunderstud here. I don't want to see any command line
in a GUI (for a OS like Eric will be) either
[my only interests are in a graphics BIOS].

This monitor should be only a little tool in the (early) development phase.
And bochs doesn't emuluate enough PC hardware :-(  (PCI, SDRAM, etc.).
I know that it's out, but how do you want to test the BIOS in REAL hardware?
At the time I was working on my little BIOS, my work-cycle was:
[I hadn't an ICE]
programming->burning into EPROM->pressing ROMs into the sockets->
On an error a had to fiddle the EPROMs out and start the whole thing again.
I know there are some ways out of this dilemma, but I thought the
monitor would be an elegant way to overcome early dev problems.
And: monitors are implemented on most embedded systems.

Bye

Bernhard

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Ronald G Minnich]

You are pretty much outlining the steps linuxbios does now. Again, I think
you all need to look at the problem a little more -- you're skipping some
steps.

The big problem is turning on sdram. You can run openbios from dos to test
it. You can't run openbios on a machine from power-up. Openbios is not yet
a real bios because it can not run on any machine with sdram, since it
does not know how to turn on sdram. That single step is absolutely a
killer. You have to know how the chipsets works, how SDRAM works, how
SMBUS works -- and then you have to work through all the chipset bugs.

Linuxbios can do these things, but they are very very hard. We have found
in some cases that chipset vendors don't have working code to turn on
SDRAM on their chipset -- only BIOS vendors have that.

Also, don't expect lots of help from most companies. Some of them are very
forward thinking -- SiS, Acer, VIA, AMD -- but others are not yet
convinced that open source bios'es will help them at all. And others are
so scared of microsoft that they don't want to help us at all.

Graphics is next. It is not just a matter of doing some io ops to the VGA
IO addresses. If you do that nothing will happen. Ever notice how on a new
machine the video BIOS is the first output you see?  that's because the
video card is completely non-functional until you run the proprietary code
that is in the card BIOS. Do you want to know what that code does? The
vendor won't tell you -- you will have to reverse engineer it.

These two single steps are the hard parts of doing a BIOS.

I hope we can all help each other out. This is a really big, hard problem
and we can't all go it alone. We could use help with some of the chipsets
we're not doing, and in turn we could help you with your problems.

ron

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin Robert Brewer]

Ahem,

Check out the following datasheet:

http://www.ami.com/support/docdl.cfm?DLFile=support/doc/amibios8.pdf&Fil...

Namaste,
    	Gav.

~--(Eric Developer)--~

http://eric.sourceforge.net
-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Ronald G Minnich]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Gavin Robert Brewer wrote:
> http://www.ami.com/support/docdl.cfm?DLFile=support/doc/amibios8.pdf&Fil...

well since every browser I've sent after this has hung on it, and
pdftotext can't deal with it, can you hint to us what this is.

ron

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin Robert Brewer]

Ronald G Minnich wrote:
> > http://www.ami.com/support/docdl.cfm?DLFile=support/doc/amibios8.pdf&Fil...
>
> well since every browser I've sent after this has hung on it, and
> pdftotext can't deal with it, can you hint to us what this is.

Sorry buddy, but when I checked it out, it was a load of crap anyhow.
It's just the, 'supposed' datasheet for AMI-BIOS. Looks like I overrated
it. *sigh*.

All the best,
    	Gav.
-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

"Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?

What ever you do, _DO NOT_ reverse engineer the AMI BIOS....

This is a VERY BAD thing to do, you will be infringing all sorts of licenses and
copyrights if you generate code mbased upon the AMI BIOS.

Yours

Matthew

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin Robert Brewer]

Guys,

Apologies for the 'useless' document I sent you.

Anyhow, does anyone know the I/O Address range of the AMI-BIOS functions
on a Pentium-class machine? (Assuming general IA-32 based architecture).

All the best,
    	Gavin.

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin Robert Brewer]

Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> "Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> > Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?
>
> What ever you do, _DO NOT_ reverse engineer the AMI BIOS....
>
> This is a VERY BAD thing to do, you will be infringing all sorts of licenses and
> copyrights if you generate code mbased upon the AMI BIOS.

hmm...thanx for the warning, but it sounds rather like a certain letter
Bill Gates wrote to Homebrew Computer Club during the 70's.

Besides, who says someone can put a patent on algorithms?

The ideas is as fascist as it is oxymoronic.

Yours,
    Gavin.
-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Chris Maresca]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Gavin Robert Brewer wrote:
> Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> > "Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> > > Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?
> >
> > What ever you do, _DO NOT_ reverse engineer the AMI BIOS....
> >
> > This is a VERY BAD thing to do, you will be infringing all sorts of licenses and
> > copyrights if you generate code mbased upon the AMI BIOS.
>
> hmm...thanx for the warning, but it sounds rather like a certain letter
> Bill Gates wrote to Homebrew Computer Club during the 70's.
>
> Besides, who says someone can put a patent on algorithms?

Software patents are nothing new.  MS has a patent on SMB, that it could
choose to enforce if it wanted to.

Matthew's advice is a very good call.  You will do the open source
community a disfavor by actively trying to reverse engineer AMI BIOS.  
And you will probably find yourself at the end of either an expensive
lawsuit or some handcuffs.

Yes, it is possible to reverse engineer stuff, but it has to be a
throughly documented, legal counsel approved, clean room operation.  It's
not something you do in your spare time.
> The ideas is as fascist as it is oxymoronic.

Get used to it.  In the US it's already a reality, and the EU is about to
pass a set of laws formalizing the practice.  The best advice is to work
independantly, don't reverse engineer, don't polute your code with
information that 'fell of the back of a truck' and try not to call your
software a similar name (aka. KIllustrator).

All that said, however, it would be HUGE if we could have an open source
bios.  Linuxbios is getting there, but needs a lot of help, although some
people have put variants of it to good use...

Chris.

"linux, only up 138 days, because california has flaky power... "

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Leighton Haynes]

On Sun, Aug 19, 2001 at 09:01:06PM -0700, Chris Maresca wrote:
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Gavin Robert Brewer wrote:
> > Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> > > "Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> > > > Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?
> > >
> > > What ever you do, _DO NOT_ reverse engineer the AMI BIOS....
> > >
> > > This is a VERY BAD thing to do, you will be infringing all sorts of licenses and
> > > copyrights if you generate code mbased upon the AMI BIOS.
> >
> > hmm...thanx for the warning, but it sounds rather like a certain letter
> > Bill Gates wrote to Homebrew Computer Club during the 70's.
> >
> > Besides, who says someone can put a patent on algorithms?
>
> Software patents are nothing new.  MS has a patent on SMB, that it could
> choose to enforce if it wanted to.
>
> Matthew's advice is a very good call.  You will do the open source
> community a disfavor by actively trying to reverse engineer AMI BIOS.  
> And you will probably find yourself at the end of either an expensive
> lawsuit or some handcuffs.

Actually, while I will agree that reverse-engineering the AMI BIOS is
not a particularly useful exercise here, I disagree that it could result
in handcuffs (legally, at least ;)). Reverse engineering is perfectly legal
in most sane countrie (the USA, in no way represents a sane country).
Nevertheless, they can still doa  fair bit to make your life miserable if they
so choose, as evidenced in the deCSS case.
> Get used to it.  In the US it's already a reality, and the EU is about to
> pass a set of laws formalizing the practice.  The best advice is to work
> independantly, don't reverse engineer, don't polute your code with
> information that 'fell of the back of a truck' and try not to call your
> software a similar name (aka. KIllustrator).

... then, if you could just fill out this 'thought' form in triplicate and wait
for approval before doing anything...
The US is just getting absurd, it's really quite sad that the EU is following 
suit.

Leighton...

New power-up graphics BIOS.

Leighton Haynes wrote:
> Actually, while I will agree that reverse-engineering the AMI BIOS is
> not a particularly useful exercise here, I disagree that it could result
> in handcuffs (legally, at least ;)). Reverse engineering is perfectly legal
> in most sane countrie (the USA, in no way represents a sane country).
> Nevertheless, they can still doa  fair bit to make your life miserable if they
> so choose, as evidenced in the deCSS case.

deCSS was nothing like the reverse engineering issue at stake here... The deCSS case is
being brought under the DMCA which forbids tools that the decrypting of copyright
material - without the authority of copyright owners.  It is being swung by the Record
companies to their favour (wrongly in my opinion) to block software that _could_ be used
to duplicate DVD's....  It is nothing to do with the reverse engineering of the Algorithm
use to encrypt the DVD's as the Algorithm was not reverse engineered to create deCSS...
that however is another story and WAY off topic... ;-)

Yours

Matthew

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Leighton Haynes]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 03:55:06PM +1000, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> Leighton Haynes wrote:
> > Actually, while I will agree that reverse-engineering the AMI BIOS is
> > not a particularly useful exercise here, I disagree that it could result
> > in handcuffs (legally, at least ;)). Reverse engineering is perfectly legal
> > in most sane countrie (the USA, in no way represents a sane country).
> > Nevertheless, they can still doa  fair bit to make your life miserable if they
> > so choose, as evidenced in the deCSS case.
>
> deCSS was nothing like the reverse engineering issue at stake here... The deCSS case is
> being brought under the DMCA which forbids tools that the decrypting of copyright
> material - without the authority of copyright owners.  It is being swung by the Record
> companies to their favour (wrongly in my opinion) to block software that _could_ be used
> to duplicate DVD's....  It is nothing to do with the reverse engineering of the Algorithm
> use to encrypt the DVD's as the Algorithm was not reverse engineered to create deCSS...
> that however is another story and WAY off topic... ;-)

Actually, I was referring to Jon Johanssen being arrested in Norway(?)
after reverse engineering css. While he certainly wasn't arrested for 
reverse-engineering, it was certainly what triggered his arrest. :)
I should have been clearer ;)

Leighton...

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Nicholas Leippe]

On Sunday 19 August 2001 22:55, you wrote:
> Leighton Haynes wrote:
> > Actually, while I will agree that reverse-engineering the AMI BIOS is
> > not a particularly useful exercise here, I disagree that it could result
> > in handcuffs (legally, at least ;)). Reverse engineering is perfectly
> > legal in most sane countrie (the USA, in no way represents a sane
> > country). Nevertheless, they can still doa  fair bit to make your life
> > miserable if they so choose, as evidenced in the deCSS case.
>
> deCSS was nothing like the reverse engineering issue at stake here... The
> deCSS case is being brought under the DMCA which forbids tools that the
> decrypting of copyright material - without the authority of copyright
> owners.  It is being swung by the Record companies to their favour (wrongly
> in my opinion) to block software that _could_ be used to duplicate
> DVD's....  It is nothing to do with the reverse engineering of the
> Algorithm use to encrypt the DVD's as the Algorithm was not reverse
> engineered to create deCSS... that however is another story and WAY off
> topic... ;-)

<lurker butting in>
It's actually worse than that.  The RIAA is not in the least concerned about
people copying their DVDs.  DeCSS in fact has nothing to do with the ability
to merely copy DVDs.  That is just a facade.  What's really eating them is
that the existence of non-licensed players (which need DeCSS) breaks their
monopoly on the DVD player market.
</lurker butting in>

As for reverse engineering--since when is it illegal to open the hood of a
car _you_ bought and figure out how it works?  Imo, it should be the same
with software.  If I buy a pc, why shouldn't I be able to decompile the
bios to see how it's bootstrapped?  I own the thing after all.  That should
be a legitimate learning experience.  And, once I've learned how it does so,
(and there may be exactly _one_ way to do certain parts of it) why should it
matter _how_ I happened to learn that if I go ahead and create my own
implementation for my own system?  Then, for those who have the same system
as I have, why can't I then share what I did so they can use it as well?
And, if it happens to apply to other systems as well, then so be it...

Unfortunately, the world has gone crazy and the above doesn't hold in court.
I hate patent law.  It's sole purpose is to make lawyers wealthier.

Nick

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Alan Grimes]

> As for reverse engineering--since when is it illegal to open the hood 
> of a car _you_ bought and figure out how it works?

Since the Federal gubbernment required all cars to have airbags which
can't be shut off.

Since the EPA required that all cars idle at a certain speed and not be
adjustable.

Since OBD2 was required that is not compatable with any off-the-shelf
computer interface devices.

Things are worse than you had thought. =( 
www.lp.org

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

Folks,

Anyone know where I can get a good value-for-money EEPROM programmer in the
UK?
(It should be able to handle Motorola chips)

All the best,
    		Gavin.

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[James Oakley]

On August 23, 2001 04:57 am, you wrote:
> Anyone know where I can get a good value-for-money EEPROM programmer in the
> UK?
> (It should be able to handle Motorola chips)

What kind of Motorola chips? Flash, EPROM, microcontroller? If it's generic 
flash/EPROM then most programmers will handle it. Weird stuff, like 
controllers require special programmers.

Since you're in the UK, pick up the latest electronics magazine. You guys 
have the *good* ones like Elektor, which costs me CAN$15.00 over here.

I just opened an issue I have here and found a very nice-looking 
relatively-cheap one at http://www.crownhill.co.uk/ called the 'PreProm' for 
£132.

Of course, there's always Maplin at http://www.maplin.co.uk/ which is quite 
popular. Even I've ordered from them and I live in Canada. They may have 
something as well.

Hope this helps.

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Tobias Diedrich]

Gavin R. Brewer wrote:
> Anyone know where I can get a good value-for-money EEPROM programmer in the
> UK?
> (It should be able to handle Motorola chips)

If you just want to program Flashroms (Which would be sufficient for BIOS
testing) you could try to order the "c't Flasher" from the german
c't Magazine...

Before I had that one I used hot-swapping :-)
(Turn on System, wait until booted into DOS, replace Flashrom on Mainboard with
another one (without turning off power), use AWARD flash utility to write
experimental BIOS, reboot, test, replace with working BIOS, repeat :-) )

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[zechmer]

Hello Thomas,
> Before I had that one I used hot-swapping :-)
> (Turn on System, wait until booted into DOS, replace Flashrom on Mainboard

with
> another one (without turning off power), use AWARD flash utility to write
> experimental BIOS, reboot, test, replace with working BIOS, repeat :-) )

I used an even harder way in the 80's: with the EPROMS 27128C and a
programming device.
I had to insert the ROMS directly into the sockets. This really isn't fun
:-(.
And the sockets got loose. Someday I inserted an EPROM the wrong way.
It smoked a little, but was still programmable after the disaster!
How to you program the BOOT-ROM?
I heard that it is fixed and not flashable. Is this right?
Do you know a good method to test the ROM directly?
[for example: just delivering the ROM data over the serial or parallel port
of your
dev. PC to the "test" Motherboard which in this case could run without ROMs
[data comes over serial port directly
into the sockets]]. Is there such circuit? What about timing problems?
Bye

Bernhard

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Chris Maresca]

On Wed, 29 Aug 2001, zechmer wrote:
> How to you program the BOOT-ROM?

If by BootROM, you are referring to code that makes a machine network
bootable, then it's generally on an EEPROM mounted on the ethernet card.

I've noticed that newer Intel MB's seem to have BootROM code in them,
using the publically documented PXE standard.  Those boards look for a
server with a TFTP server and the correct PXE init routines.

Chris.

"linux, only up 138 days, because california has flaky power... "

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[zechmer]

Hello Chris,
> If by BootROM, you are referring to code that makes a machine network
> bootable, then it's generally on an EEPROM mounted on the ethernet card.

Unfortunately not. I meant the initial routines (DMA, PIC, etc.) to bring up
the
rest of the (normally compressed) BIOS.
Anyway thanks for your words.

Bye

Bernhard

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

Gavin Robert Brewer wrote:
> Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> > "Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> > > Anyone know how to reverse engineer AMI-BIOS for example?
> >
> > What ever you do, _DO NOT_ reverse engineer the AMI BIOS....
> >
> > This is a VERY BAD thing to do, you will be infringing all sorts of licenses and
> > copyrights if you generate code mbased upon the AMI BIOS.
>
> hmm...thanx for the warning, but it sounds rather like a certain letter
> Bill Gates wrote to Homebrew Computer Club during the 70's.
>
> Besides, who says someone can put a patent on algorithms?
>
> The ideas is as fascist as it is oxymoronic.

Maybe it is but there was a lot of dicussion about BIOS's and reverse engineering and
'clean rooming' before on this list and if I remember rightly a list member having
trained/part trained as a lawyer warned us about reverse engineering and copying of
code.

If memory serves me the problem comes down to if you have read the code and any of
the code matches the original it can be deemed that you have copied it... however if
you have never seen/read the code and write the exact same instructions you can
legally use it.... The hard part is proving how you wrote the code without
seeing/reading  the original...

Yours

Matthew

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

-----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail]
[mailto:[e-mail]]On Behalf Of Matthew Sullivan
Sent: Monday, August 20, 2001 5:09 AM
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [OpenBIOS] New power-up graphics BIOS.
> Maybe it is but there was a lot of dicussion about BIOS's and reverse

engineering and
> 'clean rooming' before on this list and if I remember rightly a list member

having
> trained/part trained as a lawyer warned us about reverse engineering and

copying of
> code.

Fair play, but when you decompile and reverse engineer, THEN port to another
platform, who has the slightest shred of proof?
> If memory serves me the problem comes down to if you have read the code and

any of
> the code matches the original it can be deemed that you have copied it...

Fair enough, but what if two people from opposite sides of the globe come up
with nearly identical designs and thus source code? Then you start having
silly competetive ego-battles galore. (I dont think Richard Stallman would
approve..)
> however if
> you have never seen/read the code and write the exact same instructions you

can
> legally use it....

People decompile all the time in firms and such. Why make a secret of it?
Mind you, I am a EFF hacktivist, so that goes without saying..
> The hard part is proving how you wrote the code,

The Law sux in this respect. I get sick of Micro$oft running the US, and the
US running the world like the 51st state of America. What happened to the
Hacker Ethic? Died when M$ was born?
> without seeing/reading  the original...

Grrr...now THAT is the old argument that really p!%%#s me off. When you
obtain source code, you get an executable file. Are you telling me that it
is *wrong* to look at the executable source, to admire it's wonderful
engineering etc. etc.?

How can you patent Mathematics? After all, is that what design principles,
algorithms and data structures come down to in the end anyhow?

I'll tell you what they are: DISCRETE MATHEMATICS.

And if anyone wants to patent the sacred platonic purity of D.M., they ought
to be shoved in a loony-bin somewhere...The whole matter is a contradiction
in terms, if you ask me.

Yours,
    	Gavin.

PS. Please dont take any of the above personally. d:-)

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

This is going off topic a bit, so appologies to those who don't want the spam -
hit that delete key now ;-)...

"Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> -----Original Message-----
> > Maybe it is but there was a lot of dicussion about BIOS's and reverse
>
> engineering and
> > 'clean rooming' before on this list and if I remember rightly a list member
>
> having
> > trained/part trained as a lawyer warned us about reverse engineering and
>
> copying of
> > code.
>
> Fair play, but when you decompile and reverse engineer, THEN port to another
> platform, who has the slightest shred of proof?

The problem is proving you did not just copy it, before porting it...
> > If memory serves me the problem comes down to if you have read the code and
>
> any of
> > the code matches the original it can be deemed that you have copied it...
>
> Fair enough, but what if two people from opposite sides of the globe come up
> with nearly identical designs and thus source code? Then you start having
> silly competetive ego-battles galore. (I dont think Richard Stallman would
> approve..)

Then it's not a problem so long as neither looked at each others source neither
will be liable for copyright violations (remembering at this point that both
would have to have copyrighted their software at some point and it is likely
that they would do so at around the same time)...
> > however if
> > you have never seen/read the code and write the exact same instructions you
>
> can
> > legally use it....
>
> People decompile all the time in firms and such. Why make a secret of it?

Because if it states in a valid license that the software is not to be reverse
engineered then that invalidates your right to use/view the software...?
> Mind you, I am a EFF hacktivist, so that goes without saying..

makes no difference to me
> > The hard part is proving how you wrote the code,
>
> The Law sux in this respect. I get sick of Micro$oft running the US, and the
> US running the world like the 51st state of America. What happened to the
> Hacker Ethic?

The law sux for a lot of things, but unless you want to spend time in jail you
accept the law as it stands or move to somewhere where the law is different.....

The M$ argument - well considering my employers you would guess that I,
personally, agree that M$ pulls the strings in certain places and that is
wrong.... However there is more than m$ at issue....  Living outside of the USA
I have found that generally nothing exists outside of the USA - well that's how
all the head offices/engineers seem to think. (Particually engineers that are
writing TimeZone code!!! ;-/)

Hacker ethic is a different matter, and each has a different view about what it
is...
> Died when M$ was born?

Not at all (at least not from my perspective).
> > without seeing/reading  the original...
>
> Grrr...now THAT is the old argument that really p!%%#s me off. When you
> obtain source code, you get an executable file.

If you have the source you follow the license that allows you to use the source,
not a problem...
> Are you telling me that it
> is *wrong* to look at the executable source, to admire it's wonderful
> engineering etc. etc.?

No, however if you intend to write something that will do the same/similar
things, viewing someone elses source is a bad thing unless you intend licensing
it as per the writers/copyright owners wish....

For example I have just written a news->html client for the base64->binary and
quoted-printable->8bit conversions I used 2 functions prewritten by some clever
people in the University of Washington.  It saved me a lot of time and effort,
so I wrote to them asking permission to use the functions... they were more than
happy to allow me.  So now I am releasing the client under the MPL (Mozilla
Public License) .......

Now if I had just copied their functions it would be quite likely that sooner or
later they would have seen them and they would have asked that I do not use them
anymore they would be within their rights to stop me using the functions....
Theat would have had a dramatic effect...  I would have had to have written 2
new functions not using their simple and quick code, effectively I would have
had to re-invent the wheel without making it round.
> How can you patent Mathematics? After all, is that what design principles,
> algorithms and data structures come down to in the end anyhow?

In the literal sense maybe, however another similar example is drugs, they are
all made up of elements in the purest form, atoms if you want to go further
etc... yet drugs can be patented, you may as well just levy the same argument
against the drugs companies....
> I'll tell you what they are: DISCRETE MATHEMATICS.
>
> And if anyone wants to patent the sacred platonic purity of D.M., they ought
> to be shoved in a loony-bin somewhere...The whole matter is a contradiction
> in terms, if you ask me.
>
> PS. Please dont take any of the above personally. d:-)

I don't... ;-)

However, I do think you maybe misguided in your analysis of the issue (about 4
years ago I remember having a similar conversation.  I had, what I think is,
your view of the world now, then.  Looking back I know I was wrong - I maybe
wrong to apply the same logic now, if I am, no doubt someone will tell me ;-)).

Yours

Matthew

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

> Now if I had just copied their functions it would be quite likely that

sooner or
> later they would have seen them and they would have asked that I do not use

them
> anymore they would be within their rights to stop me using the

functions....
> Theat would have had a dramatic effect...  I would have had to have written

2
> new functions not using their simple and quick code, effectively I would

have
> had to re-invent the wheel without making it round.

Good point. I am usually v. careful to give credit where credit is due, else
I might get stung. Pehaps that should be the end of the matter. d:-)

All the best,
    		Gavin.

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Leighton Haynes]

On Mon, Aug 20, 2001 at 04:26:43PM +1000, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> This is going off topic a bit, so appologies to those who don't want the spam -
> hit that delete key now ;-)...

Yeah, what he said :)
> "Gavin R. Brewer" wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > > Maybe it is but there was a lot of dicussion about BIOS's and reverse
> >
> > engineering and
> > > 'clean rooming' before on this list and if I remember rightly a list member
> >
> > having
> > > trained/part trained as a lawyer warned us about reverse engineering and
> >
> > copying of
> > > code.
> >
> > Fair play, but when you decompile and reverse engineer, THEN port to another
> > platform, who has the slightest shred of proof?
>
> The problem is proving you did not just copy it, before porting it...

Most countries still have the innocent until proven guilty thing happening. :)

Of course, most countries also have the 'the man with the biggest lawyers wins'
thing happening too :(
> > > If memory serves me the problem comes down to if you have read the code and
> >
> > any of
> > > the code matches the original it can be deemed that you have copied it...
> >
> > Fair enough, but what if two people from opposite sides of the globe come up
> > with nearly identical designs and thus source code? Then you start having
> > silly competetive ego-battles galore. (I dont think Richard Stallman would
> > approve..)
>
> Then it's not a problem so long as neither looked at each others source neither
> will be liable for copyright violations (remembering at this point that both
> would have to have copyrighted their software at some point and it is likely
> that they would do so at around the same time)...

An issue with software patents comes from the fact that you now have to start
proving that your software constitutes 'prior art', and you may
have to do this in court. I don't know about anyone else, but my home coding
is not exactly that well documented until after i've completed it, and I 
certainly don't have the money to defend myself in court. Luckily I'm 
in Australia, so I'm relatively safe. (Until of course, I go to the states for a
holiday, and get arrested.))
> > > however if
> > > you have never seen/read the code and write the exact same instructions you
> >
> > can
> > > legally use it....
> >
> > People decompile all the time in firms and such. Why make a secret of it?
>
> Because if it states in a valid license that the software is not to be reverse
> engineered then that invalidates your right to use/view the software...?

In several countries, reverse engineering comes under the heading of 'fair use'
and is a protected right of the consumer. He is actually right that decompiling
and refverse engineering hapopen in firms all the time, primarily in trying
to work out how the hell something works, when the pathetic documentation fails
them :)
> > The Law sux in this respect. I get sick of Micro$oft running the US, and the
> > US running the world like the 51st state of America. What happened to the
> > Hacker Ethic?
>
> The law sux for a lot of things, but unless you want to spend time in jail you
> accept the law as it stands or move to somewhere where the law is different.....
> The M$ argument - well considering my employers you would guess that I,
> personally, agree that M$ pulls the strings in certain places and that is
> wrong.... However there is more than m$ at issue....  Living outside of the USA
> I have found that generally nothing exists outside of the USA - well that's how
> all the head offices/engineers seem to think. (Particually engineers that are
> writing TimeZone code!!! ;-/)

The USA is amazingly USA-centric. It's quite worrying.
> Hacker ethic is a different matter, and each has a different view about what it
> is...
> From what I've seen of the hacker ethic, it wasn't very ethical ;)
> > Are you telling me that it
> > is *wrong* to look at the executable source, to admire it's wonderful
> > engineering etc. etc.?
>
> No, however if you intend to write something that will do the same/similar
> things, viewing someone elses source is a bad thing unless you intend licensing
> it as per the writers/copyright owners wish....

Well, from a pragmatic point of view, I agree. But it's important to note
that you're doing it as a path-of-least resistance thing, more than because
it's wrong, or any such thing :)
> > How can you patent Mathematics? After all, is that what design principles,
> > algorithms and data structures come down to in the end anyhow?
>
> In the literal sense maybe, however another similar example is drugs, they are
> all made up of elements in the purest form, atoms if you want to go further
> etc... yet drugs can be patented, you may as well just levy the same argument
> against the drugs companies....

I don't have an issue so much against the concept of software patents. 
The issues lie more in their definition of 'innovative' and the length that
patents run for. THe concept of a patent was originally to give the
innovater a period of time to exploit his invention before others
could, which seems all well and good. I have no problem with people 
profiting from their ideas. The problems are that the patent offices
are tending to just approve all patents, no matter how obvious, and that the
patents last far too long for an industry such as computers, where new ideas have
a horribly short life.

Leighton...

New power-up graphics BIOS.

[Gavin R. Brewer]

Guys,

Just to make life even more spammy, I am looking to use the MacOS 8 Human
Interface Spec. for a new Operating System. What should I do about this
legally?

The relevance of this topic is that some of the basic graphics primitives
are to be burnt into EPROM BIOS, (+ I cannot find the appropriate newsgroup
to post this).

All the best,
    		Gavin.

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message

OT: Reverse Engineering (was Re: New power-up graphics BIOS.)

[Chris Maresca]

On Mon, 20 Aug 2001, Matthew Sullivan wrote:
> If memory serves me the problem comes down to if you have read the code and any of
> the code matches the original it can be deemed that you have copied it... however if
> you have never seen/read the code and write the exact same instructions you can
> legally use it.... The hard part is proving how you wrote the code without
> seeing/reading  the original...

Reverse engineering is done like this:

1. Hire/involve two groups of engineers, seperate them completely
2. Have group 1 produce a complete, detailed specification of the workings
    of the product to be 'reverse engineered'
3. Group 2 produces software to the spec of group 1
4. Usually, a third and independant group tests for interoperability

In this whole process, you have to document every interaction, every
process, the way of seperate teams and how you keep leaders/instigators
from 'tainting' the results.

Yes, in most countries it's legal to reverse engineer (even in the US).
It's illegal, however, to decompile and use the resulting code.  At the
very least, that's a copyright violation.  Reverse engineering !=
decompiling, there's a lot more to it than that.

If you are prepared and equiped to follow a strict 'reverse engineering'
process, you should also be aware that many companies also protect their
'intellectual proprety' with patents.  While all of us may disagree with
software or business methodology patents, that doesn't change the facts on
the ground...

Chris.

"linux, only up 138 days, because california has flaky power... "

-
To unsubscribe: send mail to [e-mail]
with 'unsubscribe openbios' in the body of the message