Merge your own dump.bin with a FULL firmware

Support requests for wrong Fw uptading and ressurection of dead players.

Postby ~J-@Ð!~ » Sun Mar 12, 2006 10:00 pm

Roeoender wrote:What advantage in this batch script gives using undocumented and obscure feature of "::" over using documented and widely known since BASIC times command "rem"?


REM is slower, because it is a COMMAND, and DOS read ALL the line when it executes it, don't ask me why. With "::" however, it IGNORES the line because DOS know that it is an useless label. And even for few μs I do that every time I write a batch file, because I just like to do the thing the right way.

Roeoender wrote:Even if this behaviour is supported by every M$ OS since DOS 1.0 you can't be sure it will work on future OSes.


It will, because it is just tricked labels. :P

Roeoender wrote:The funny thing is that main role of comments is to help readers to know what is going on, using "::" you do just the opposite :-).


Hey, we can use "#" instead of REM, and it doesn't confuse everybody. The only con for using that char is that I don't think that it is compatible with "lower" version of DOS. The double semi-colon "::" too doesn't confuse everybody, since you just have to look at what is written at the right to notice that it is a REM.
Take a look of my hot boot/bye animations:
Image Image
Go to Gallery section you Kirby lovers ;)!
___
ZD 0411 Ver 1.2 LAURA, 512MB, 7 colours, no FM
User avatar
~J-@Ð!~
S1mp3 (and Kirby) lover
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Québec!!!

Postby Roeoender » Mon Mar 13, 2006 10:40 am

REM is slower

LOL maybe this speed gain could be noticable in 1989 on 8086 with 14Mhz procerssor, but on modern computers simple positioning hard drive head for next IO operation or some other random background activity of OS will eat all the gain probably for hundereds of such "optimizations".

I see some inconsequence in your code then: using "for" loops to execute those "ren"s and "del"s is certainly slower than using those commands in-line, it is surely less readable too, but I guess it wouldn't look so smart that way. :roll:

I just like to do the thing the right way.

By "the right way" most people mean using correct tools for given work. ":" was designed for labels, "::" is a bug in interpreter, "rem" was designed for comments. Which one is the right thing for writing comments then? :-)
This is precisely why I'm continuing this thread - use the right stuff, forget about dirty hacks.

It will, because it is just tricked labels.

I wouldn't be so sure, for example M$ might come up to idea of actually parsing scripts before executing (I bet: for security reasons ;-)). Regular expression for label would then be :[a-zA-Z][a-zA-Z0-9_]* thus double-coloner won't fit it so we would have a syntax error here.

Hey, we can use "#" instead of REM

Yep, on of my OSes is Win98 - '#' won't work.
Roeoender
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:48 am
Location: Poland

Postby ~J-@Ð!~ » Mon Mar 13, 2006 6:35 pm

You are persistant :) ... but I'm obstinate, and you cannot change what I think.

see some inconsequence in your code then: using "for" loops to execute those "ren"s and "del"s is certainly slower than using those commands in-line, it is surely less readable too, but I guess it wouldn't look so smart that way.


Why using several lines when one line can do all? :? And I don't care of the "readability", since the principal thing is that I have to know what my batch files do.

By "the right way" most people mean using correct tools for given work. ":" was designed for labels, "::" is a bug in interpreter, "rem" was designed for comments. Which one is the right thing for writing comments then?
This is precisely why I'm continuing this thread - use the right stuff, forget about dirty hacks.


I see... an orthodox programmer :P You should not see then my batch files, since it will be too much obscur and hacking for you... and ops! not readable at all!
Take a look of my hot boot/bye animations:
Image Image
Go to Gallery section you Kirby lovers ;)!
___
ZD 0411 Ver 1.2 LAURA, 512MB, 7 colours, no FM
User avatar
~J-@Ð!~
S1mp3 (and Kirby) lover
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Québec!!!

Postby Roeoender » Tue Mar 14, 2006 9:19 pm

And I don't care of the "readability", since the principal thing is that I have to know what my batch files do.

Well then imagine you work in a team using CVS, do you think that your team members
would enjoy spending time on "disassembling" what you wrote?
Probably they would prefer trashi it and rewrite code from scratch (yet another bad practice).

I wonder it you still wouldn't care if you'd have not 3 batch files, but
say 20, interconnected and suddenly after 1 yr. it would seem that something doesn't work.
I've cooked some nice script to give you a try:

@echo off
Set @=set
Rem ember NOT
%#%%@% $_=%@% _$
%$_%_=to
%_$%write "nul"
%$_%co=de.
%@% _$@=Start
%=now=, >>%
::if
%@% U=% a
%@re@%%@%%@@% @@=%mat
%>ure.<%
:$
%$_%_$=Go
%@% _$=for
%$_%_$_$=it
::OR::
%_$@% %_$%%@@%%U%:
%_$_$%%will%%_$_% $
$uffer.

What does this code do :twisted:?
I warn you that before executing it at least save your work and remove remove any floppies.

an orthodox programmer

No not an orthodox, just a programmer that is tired of seeing overly-complicated code everywhere.
Writing people-friendly code and keeping things simple are probably the most important programmer's virtues,
especially in the open software era.
Roeoender
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2006 9:48 am
Location: Poland

Postby JedOi » Thu Mar 16, 2006 4:58 pm

A dump file usually contains only 4 files where a FULL file contains around 13 files ... this can be checked by making a script from a firmware file and opening the script file (with notepad or similar) and seeing how many files it contains using the command " s1fwx s file.bin > file.script "

You will also see other useful info in the .script file like f/w version/date and some of the main default settings etc'.

Hope this helps.
User avatar
JedOi
Moderator
Moderator
 
Posts: 582
Joined: Tue Oct 25, 2005 4:47 am
Location: UK

Postby ~J-@Ð!~ » Fri Mar 17, 2006 10:18 pm

Roeoender: [clap!][clap!][clap!] :) Nice! Thanks, then.

Hum... :roll: "Start format a:" in perpetual loop... I don't know if there was anything else that surpass my knowledge (I guess not), and I don't know what special thing does "write "nul"", since I didn't run it, but you might be happy to know that it took me over 10 minutes to understand your few lines, helping myself with a paper to write all environment variables... You won. :)

Well, I would never wrote a batch file as unreadable as that, but you learn me something. I'll take that in consideration when I'll learn other things than DOS and TI-84+ BASIC (the graphic calculator built-in programming language :P ). Okay, it will not change my "::" that seems to irritate you, because I too used to it, and the "For %%t (echo goto:something) ..." because it is just too useful sometimes, but I'll definitively put a important regard to it... Sometimes it is difficult with DOS to get a batch file not too long when you just want to do something who happens, and otherwise do the same thing, but NOT that line for example... For that I'm tented to use environment variables to just skip the line (set no=:: ;) ), but yes it may cause trouble to understand it out... I always told me that anyway I don't really care of the people who receive my batch file, because they just have to notify me when there is a problem, and if they are enough competent to understand what I wrote, free to them to modify it... Keep in mind that it is just the good ol' DOS, and for batch files it can't do a lot of things... It requires a big and complex routine just to display time or date (not like "Time" or "Date" output this, but as little strings thru "Prompt). Anyway, I guess that I'll not encounter that kind of problem with more evoluate language (like C++ :D )

P.S.: Hey! What (programming) language you recommend me to learn first? Well, I NEVER did a real single computer program, but in the other hand I know that I have a good understanding capability, and at least I did some program on calculator, so I guess that I have the program-minding. Please, don't say PC assembly, because I'll kill you.
Take a look of my hot boot/bye animations:
Image Image
Go to Gallery section you Kirby lovers ;)!
___
ZD 0411 Ver 1.2 LAURA, 512MB, 7 colours, no FM
User avatar
~J-@Ð!~
S1mp3 (and Kirby) lover
 
Posts: 163
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 6:28 pm
Location: Québec!!!

Postby wladston » Sat Apr 15, 2006 4:36 am

please guys, refer to the viewtopic.php?t=2310

let's make a true set of bash files.
1GB Standard s1 mp3 player. (MP-482C MAIN V8)
1GB "mp4" s1mp3 player. Not remarked.
I DO __NOT__ reply to PM's. Send email instead. I won't be even notified for new PM's.
User avatar
wladston
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1721
Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 8:54 pm
Location: Belo Horizonte, MG - Brazil

For JedOi - Need help with Fake Ipod Nano

Postby guivarrichio » Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:45 am

Hello JedOi, I´m from Brazil and I bought a fake ipod nano...
It had 2 gb, for some reason, it turned into 1 gb, so I tried to update firmware, what happened? I think it´s dead momentaneally.

I merged files and I continue to receive the error message "Invalid Upgrade firmware file!".

I have opened my mp4 and I saw this inside it...
APPLE-M V2
2005/11/08

I have downloaded the file from the firmware page...
http://www.s1mp3.org/files/firmware/fw_ ... _1.5_C2.7z, but I receive the same error message,

Could you please help me?

I´ll be very thankful.
guivarrichio
 
Posts: 2
Joined: Thu Jun 08, 2006 5:26 am

Postby MP3_Newbie » Sun Jun 25, 2006 9:47 am

I have managed to merge a firmware from the archive with a 3.5.35 dump kindly posted by some one for me. Unfortunately I still get two angels guarding the MP3 players as before. The drive is recognised by Windows hardware detection but does not show in Windows Explorer as it is not funtioning as a mass USB device.

Are there any methods for getting a dead MP3 player back as a USB device, before trying to turn it back into an MP3 player?
MP3_Newbie
 
Posts: 14
Joined: Fri Jun 23, 2006 10:32 pm

Postby ace68 » Thu Jun 29, 2006 1:58 pm

MP3_Newbie wrote:I have managed to merge a firmware from the archive with a 3.5.35 dump kindly posted by some one for me. Unfortunately I still get two angels guarding the MP3 players as before. The drive is recognised by Windows hardware detection but does not show in Windows Explorer as it is not funtioning as a mass USB device.

Are there any methods for getting a dead MP3 player back as a USB device, before trying to turn it back into an MP3 player?


im bored......lookin at this post which is very old..i just wanna make a fun out of it :twisted:

MP3_newbie....you seeing angels guarding the mp3 player?I guess its going to heaven then :P lol peace
ace68
s2 poster
 
Posts: 115
Joined: Wed Jun 21, 2006 10:26 pm
Location: Toronto, Canada

Postby ian_hawdon » Tue Jul 11, 2006 2:30 pm

ace68 wrote: MP3_newbie....you seeing angels guarding the mp3 player?I guess its going to heaven then :P lol peace


If you look hard enough on our old forum (hosted at forumforfree) you will find that joke has already been done!
Who is General Error and why is he reading my hard drive? :D

If any of my posts have helped you, or if you're interested, click this link and sign up to help me get a free iPhone: http://apple.real-incentives.com/40461
User avatar
ian_hawdon
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 978
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2005 7:00 pm
Location: Newcastle Upon-Tyne, England

I don't understand-the merging part

Postby yahoo » Sun Aug 13, 2006 5:28 pm

Hi.

my mp4 player is in ADFU mode.
I used S1fwx to extract the firmware from other mp4 player with the same characteristics( board, firmware,,,etc..).
then I made a "dump.bin" file after that, using the repair batch file I got a repaired dump.bin file-(dump.bid$)

I have found an APPARENTLY compatible firmware from the list (s1mp3.org), same board, same firmware version.

board:MP 693C-SL MAIN V13 2005 12.14
firmware: ACT_V3.5 35 2006/03/29
my mp4 player uses the same one it's a:
Nano like -mp4 player 1G capacity(samsung chip 619 K9K8G08UDA)

The problem now is that I don't understand what I should do next...If I use the merge batch from you and the APPARENTLY SUITABLE firmware from the list I COULD STILL KILL MY MP4 PLAYER?? It's that a possibility??

Thanks a lot

Yahoo
Yahoo
yahoo
 
Posts: 5
Joined: Sat Aug 05, 2006 5:12 am
Location: Colombia

Postby Zim_256 » Tue Feb 13, 2007 1:30 pm

After those stupid discussion about the old and stupid .bat files, let me point for ppl with death players that is far easy to flash a full firmware and then the dump.bin.

There isn't any need to merge the two firmwares.

If after flashing the full firmware the removable disk appears write protected you have to replace one file on the full firmware with one found on the dump.bin.
Z6 Comp Sys
User avatar
Zim_256
s1 mp3 poster
s1 mp3 poster
 
Posts: 249
Joined: Thu May 25, 2006 5:47 pm
Location: Argentina

Postby alaa2003 » Sun Apr 01, 2007 3:53 am

thanks alot... i have faced this problem and didnot resolve it

your method make me solve it
..
my friend give me new MP3 and told me the size is 1GB
whn i going to put more 300 or 400 MB by mp3 and unplug it i found that there arenot some folderes i have copied..when i plug it i see strang charcters and when i go to del it appear message that he canot del it....i tried to format it more time but the problem not solve...after that i give it new firmware..but i didnot look to Board ID ..i looked only to version..after that the MP3 not open...it recognize as flash drive...and the size become 230MB inly...i tried to backup the flash from MP3 with 512MB..like it exactly...and give it but i have faced the problem you have explained...i tried your method and i succeed in fixing it again but the size still 230 MB....is the firmware not compatible or the real size is 256 and appear 230MB

note :hynix
HY27UF082G2A

I WAIT YOUR REPLY...THANKS ALOT MY FRIEND
alaa2003
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:41 am

Postby alaa2003 » Sun Apr 01, 2007 4:02 am

if you please have this firmware please give me link to it..
and also tell me if the size is 1 GB how i reback it

ID board: MP3-261.pcb. ver:5.0
firmware vesion:3.5.37



note: when i give it new firmware u make it it turned to 1GB..and changed again to 230MB

note:see this pls http://www.mympxplayer.org/image-vp9204.html
alaa2003
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:41 am

Previous

Return to Wrong Fw update/ Recover dead devices

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 1 guest



cron