CompuServe Thread

#Bad 2620 ROM upgrade?

32 messages in this thread
#19858From: Mark SterlingFeb 1, 1992 7:26 PM
I just rec'd the ROM upgrade kit for my ancient A2620 board. It had rev -01 roms in it. It had been working OK in an A2000 until I installed 2.04 rom. I pulled the board until I got the new roms for it. After carefully installing the roms I installed it and pppppppp. I get nothing but a red screen. I tried it in a 1.3 2000 and I get a black screen. I pull the roms and refit the -01 roms. I get no problems in the 1.3 2000. It craps out on the 2.04 2000 as expected (dumps into the 2620 monitor). Sound like a bad ROM? Is that what the red screen means? I disabled half and then all of the ram on the card with no success. ….Mark Sterling 74335,1677
#19876From: Don Curtis/SYSOPFeb 2, 1992 1:57 AM
Mark, Obviously either bad ROMs, or improperly installed ROMs for the 2620. The new 07 ROMs do work…I've got them in my 2620. Don
#19889From: Mark SterlingFeb 2, 1992 9:44 AM
I checked, checked and re-checked my installation of the ROMS. They have the same part number (except for the suffix) as the old ROMS. I put them in the same sockets, there are no bent pins, not upside down and not transposed. I guess they are bad. The dealer had one more set when I was there Thurs. ….Mark Sterling 74335,1677
#19932From: Betty Clay/SYSOPFeb 3, 1992 1:45 AM
Mark, I had one bad ROM in my set, too. I'm still waiting for a replacement. My dealer has not had them available. They did get a few sets in October, but had sold them all before we discovered that mine were bad. You're lucky that they are available at your dealer. Betty
#19949From: Mark SterlingFeb 3, 1992 5:14 PM
Betty, Today I found that some 2620 (NOT 2630) boards do not operate with the new ROM set. C= has not found a solution or decided what to do at this point. My ROM set is probably not defective. 8^P I hope they come up with something soon. ….Mark Sterling 74335,1677
#19968From: Betty Clay/SYSOPFeb 3, 1992 11:16 PM
Have you tried the program in the AmigaUser Library 12: 26X0_F.LZH 12 6K 11-06-91 NON-ROM fix for 2620/30 2.0 kickstart I'm planning to try that one later tonight and see if it will tide me over until I can get the chips.
#19990From: Mark SterlingFeb 4, 1992 6:35 PM
I have that file but haven't tried it. I read the docs and I think I know what to do. It might be a while before something is done about the problem so it might be time to try it.
#19994From: Bill ThompsonFeb 4, 1992 10:28 PM
IF that doesn't work for you ( it didn't for me ) I can upload or post my solution.
#20028From: Betty Clay/SYSOPFeb 5, 1992 10:06 PM
We would certainly welcome your solution, Bill. Betty
#20069From: Bill ThompsonFeb 6, 1992 7:42 PM
OK, here goes… 1) First, you need the program found here that creates a file image of the 2.0 ROMs, I believe that it is called 26X0_F.lzh. 2) create a directory in your system partition for old commands. This is necessary, since several 'c' directory commands will not be found in the new 2.0 'c' directory ( they are in the ROM!) Copy the 1.3 'c' directory commands to this new directory. (mine is called wb1.3) 3) Rename your startup-sequence as startup2 or some such, and create a new startup-sequence that has the following: dh0:wb1.3/c/path dh0:wb1.3/c dh0:tools add failat 20 version > NIL: exec.library 37 if WARN setcpu KICKROM dh0:kickstart2.04 ELSE path reset execute dh0:s/Startup-2.0 ENDIF What happens here is that the version command will be found, and will fail, if the 1.3 ROM and 2.0 disk collide. This causes the setcpu command to execute, copying the correct ROM image to RAM and uses it to reboot! This is pretty much what the 26X0_F file says to do, but you must have access to the old 'c' version command. This was not described in the 26X0_F file. Also note that the path is reset so that the old commands will not be found if the 2.0 image is in RAM. One last comment, you will want to add a line to your user-startup file to move the ROM image from chip RAM to fast RAM, otherwise you won't have much chip RAM left! Hope this helps! ..Bill 😉
#20073From: Betty Clay/SYSOPFeb 6, 1992 11:59 PM
Bill, Thanks for the instructions. If my other methods don't work – and I still can't find the ROMs, I'll try it out. Sounds as though it is easy enough, once you get it set up. Betty
#19972From: Jim DuttonFeb 4, 1992 1:25 AM
Where did you get your A2620 Rev 07 ROM's? It seems hard enough to get Rev 06 ROM's.
#20008From: Don Curtis/SYSOPFeb 5, 1992 1:26 AM
I got mine directly from Commodore thru the developer's program. I believe that the '07s are all that they're shipping now to anyone.
#20076From: Jim DuttonFeb 7, 1992 2:31 AM
Is there any major difference between the A2620-06's and the A2620-07's ?? – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois)
#20079From: Don Curtis/SYSOPFeb 7, 1992 2:47 AM
Jim, I don't know, other than the dates on the 07's are exactly 6 months past the date on the 06's That's the date burned into the ROM, I presume it's the version date. I would guess there was some bug fix or improvement. For example I am pretty sure the 06 ROMs still had UNIX as one of the boot options while the07 doesn't have UNIX as a boot option. It's still available from the monitor though should we ever get a UNIX for the 2500. Other than that…no idea. Don
#20084From: Black Belt SystemsFeb 7, 1992 12:30 PM
07 will still boot unix – it's just not in the same menu sequence, Don. –Ben
#20099From: Don Curtis/SYSOPFeb 7, 1992 11:28 PM
Ben, UNIX isn't on the menu, but it's still in the monitor…so I presume you have to go into the ROM monitor to boot it. You know of a different way? Not that it matters…don't have (but would love) UNIX on this beastie anyway. Don
#20131From: Black Belt SystemsFeb 8, 1992 10:43 PM
No – as far as I know, you're correct. But you CAN boot it. –Ben
#20128From: Jim DuttonFeb 8, 1992 8:02 PM
Hmm – OK – thanks for the info about the A2620 rev 06 & rev 07 ROMS. I am still awaiting an order that was originally posted for the rev 06'ers. I wonder if I will get 07's instead? – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois)
#20136From: Don Curtis/SYSOPFeb 9, 1992 2:07 AM
Jim, I think they're only shippping the -07's now….but guess they'll have to wait and see. Don
#20285From: Jim DuttonFeb 12, 1992 1:10 AM
OK – thanks (on the '07's). – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois) (Internet: ca0008@siucvmb.siu.edu)
#20081From: Andy FinkelFeb 7, 1992 8:43 AM
The Unix boot code got reworked to follow the 2.0 rigid disk block standard. Also, I think -07 is the first version that uses just the right mouse button to go to the processor select screen, rather than both. This avoids the traditional "mouse dance" that was required when 2.0 is installed (both the 2630 roms and 2.0 look for both mouse buttons) andy
#20129From: Jim DuttonFeb 8, 1992 8:02 PM
Thanks for the info on the dancing mice (didn't know they DID that) and the right mouse button (I canNOT stand messy-dos platforms that think they are SO cute using a ONE button mouse – give me a break!). – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois)
#20130From: SyndesisFeb 8, 1992 10:34 PM
I've *never* seen a PC mouse with less than two buttons – a few have three, or more, but Windows uses two, so most are now two button mice. Of course, the Mac stumbles along with one.
#20284From: Jim DuttonFeb 12, 1992 1:10 AM
Right – MOST mice have two buttons, no matter what the hardware platform they are being used with. My comment was based upon the fact that I have not seen ANY MS-DOS applications that use BOTH buttons. You mention that Windows uses two, while I have seen whatever version other people are using at work using only one. Oh well – it doesn't really matter cuz I canNOT stand the Microsoft serial mouse. To me, it is not only gross to use, but even gross to touch. While the standard Amiga mouse may not win many awards, I will take it ANY day over the Microsoft "brick" people at work use. I also am continually amazed at how much MS-DOS fails to provide for in any one particular version of DOS. Look at ALL of what was available with AmigaDOS and STILL is (real two button functions and applications, better than VGA and color graphics, multitasking, etc.). MS-DOS is nothing but an endless stream of marketing. If IBM is smart, they will put EVERYTHING THEY CAN into OS/2 that can be used for the next 3-5 years so they don't need to continually re-introduce an incomplete OS! – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois) (Internet: ca0008@siucvmb.siu.edu)
#20353From: Jonathan HirschmanFeb 13, 1992 7:55 PM
Jim– I think that OS/2 is a bit TOO complete. Last I heard, it takes up 25 megs of hard drive space…maybe they should license AmigaDOS…. Jonathan – via Whap!
#20390From: John Toebes/SYSOPFeb 14, 1992 10:19 PM
I have OS/2, Windows 3.0, and Windows 3.1 all on my PC here and I really can't say that OS/2 is *that* big. The biggest thing to realize is that just about everything I have run into on the pc uses tons of disk space. Even the paint package I got for my little girl weighs in over 2 meg.
#20395From: Jim DuttonFeb 15, 1992 1:52 AM
Speaking of software space requirements, one of my cohorts at work (we are a fairly good sized big blue shop in a good sized university) imtimated that several MS-DOS and/or OS/2 products that he was installing were requiring somewhere around 20-30 megs of "DASD"!! I look at what I use on my Amiga and though some of them (like AmigaVision) due require several meg, I don't have or know of ANY single software application that requires that much disk space on an Amiga!? – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois) (Internet: ca0008@siucvmb.siu.edu)
#20396From: Jim DuttonFeb 15, 1992 1:52 AM
Oh – yeh – not only does OS/2 gobble up disk space like it was going out of style, but one needs something like 8Mb of RAM just to make it work reasonably well (at least for OS/2 V2.0)!? – Using Whap! (from Southern Illinois) (Internet: ca0008@siucvmb.siu.edu)
#20036From: Andrew J. RichardsonFeb 6, 1992 1:42 AM
mark, what rev. is your a2620? there seems to be some problem with rev. 3 boards and the -07 roms under wb2.04. if your board is rev. 3, there is a trade in deal going on at software hut, in philadelphia. they advertise in the back of amiga world, where you'll find their phone number. i sent them my board and $200, and they sent me a gvp 22mhz. combo board (accel., scsi and 32bit ram board). if your a2620 is later than rev. 3, it could just be bad roms. andrew —Andrew
#20070From: Mark SterlingFeb 6, 1992 8:33 PM
Andrew, It is a rev. 3 2620 board. I will look for the ad. Sounds like a decent price. The 22mHz GVP board is kinda obsolete but then so is the 2620. I wonder if C= will do anything about this problem. Thanks for the tip. ….Mark Sterling 74335,1677
#20097From: Andrew J. RichardsonFeb 7, 1992 10:52 PM
mark, i had heard previous to my purchase that commodore had some sort of deal going with this software hut, for the trade in offer. i find it hard to believe that they (commodore) wouldn't use their own '030 product if they were going to get into a trade in deal. more rumors… andrew —Andrew