Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: A bit of info on the "Trailer" data bytes at end of image

Expand Messages
  • paulbart1234
    I ve now got 2 update images (version 2.3 release 24, and version 2.3 release 25), so can compare. Here s the magic 16 bytes at the end of each: 2.3R24: 00 01
    Message 1 of 6 , Aug 9, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      I've now got 2 update images (version 2.3 release 24, and version
      2.3 release 25), so can compare.

      Here's the magic 16 bytes at the end of each:

      2.3R24:
      00 01 00 00 23 24 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 6D ....#$÷eRcOmM.m

      2.3R25:
      00 01 00 00 23 25 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 B9 .
      ...#%÷eRcOmM.¹

      So, as (I think) Brian Lantz pointed out, there's some version info
      here ("23 24" and "23 25" look like the firmware version ("23 =
      2.3") and release.

      Most of the rest of the info is identical between versions: the
      first 4 bytes ("00 01 00 00" (=64K, if that matters)), the "90 F7"
      just after the version/release, and "eRcOmM".

      The last 2 bytes (or, maybe just the last byte) differ: "00 6D" in
      2.3R24, and "00 B9" in 2.3R25. Maybe this is some sort of a
      checksum??? (of this 16-byte block of data?)

      - Paulb
    • joule360
      You will note that strings run on the .bin firmware file does find eCos , btw - I wondered about that because the nslu2 is clearly running a linux kernel
      Message 2 of 6 , Aug 10, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        You will note that 'strings' run on the .bin firmware file does
        find "eCos", btw - I wondered about that because the nslu2 is
        clearly running a linux kernel and not an ecos kernel. But, redboot
        is part of the eCos project, so maybe that's why.

        nl

        --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "rwhitby" <list.yahoo@r...>
        wrote:
        > I just realised that "eRcOmM" is "ecm" and "ROM" interleaved.
        >
        > A redboot.ecm file is discussed here:
        http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-
        > 2.0/ref/rebuilding-redboot.html
        >
        > -- Rod
        >
        > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "paulbart1234" <paulbart@b...>
        > wrote:
        > > I've now got 2 update images (version 2.3 release 24, and
        version
        > > 2.3 release 25), so can compare.
        > >
        > > Here's the magic 16 bytes at the end of each:
        > >
        > > 2.3R24:
        > > 00 01 00 00 23 24 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 6D ....#$÷eRcOmM.m
        > >
        > > 2.3R25:
        > > 00 01 00 00 23 25 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 B9 .
        > > ...#%÷eRcOmM.¹
        > >
        > > So, as (I think) Brian Lantz pointed out, there's some version
        info
        > > here ("23 24" and "23 25" look like the firmware version ("23 =
        > > 2.3") and release.
        > >
        > > Most of the rest of the info is identical between versions: the
        > > first 4 bytes ("00 01 00 00" (=64K, if that matters)), the "90
        F7"
        > > just after the version/release, and "eRcOmM".
        > >
        > > The last 2 bytes (or, maybe just the last byte) differ: "00 6D"
        in
        > > 2.3R24, and "00 B9" in 2.3R25. Maybe this is some sort of a
        > > checksum??? (of this 16-byte block of data?)
        > >
        > > - Paulb
      • paulbart1234
        Yes, I believe redboot is built on eCos (redboot being a self- contained loader, it uses eCos as its mini-OS for loading Linux) - Paulb ... redboot ...
        Message 3 of 6 , Aug 10, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes, I believe redboot is built on eCos (redboot being a self-
          contained loader, it uses eCos as its mini-OS for loading Linux)

          - Paulb

          --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "joule360" <joule360@y...> wrote:
          > You will note that 'strings' run on the .bin firmware file does
          > find "eCos", btw - I wondered about that because the nslu2 is
          > clearly running a linux kernel and not an ecos kernel. But,
          redboot
          > is part of the eCos project, so maybe that's why.
          >
          > nl
          >
          > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "rwhitby" <list.yahoo@r...>
          > wrote:
          > > I just realised that "eRcOmM" is "ecm" and "ROM" interleaved.
          > >
          > > A redboot.ecm file is discussed here:
          > http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-
          > > 2.0/ref/rebuilding-redboot.html
          > >
          > > -- Rod
          > >
          > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "paulbart1234"
          <paulbart@b...>
          > > wrote:
          > > > I've now got 2 update images (version 2.3 release 24, and
          > version
          > > > 2.3 release 25), so can compare.
          > > >
          > > > Here's the magic 16 bytes at the end of each:
          > > >
          > > > 2.3R24:
          > > > 00 01 00 00 23 24 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00
          6D ....#$÷eRcOmM.m
          > > >
          > > > 2.3R25:
          > > > 00 01 00 00 23 25 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 B9 .
          > > > ...#%÷eRcOmM.¹
          > > >
          > > > So, as (I think) Brian Lantz pointed out, there's some version
          > info
          > > > here ("23 24" and "23 25" look like the firmware version ("23
          =
          > > > 2.3") and release.
          > > >
          > > > Most of the rest of the info is identical between versions:
          the
          > > > first 4 bytes ("00 01 00 00" (=64K, if that matters)), the "90
          > F7"
          > > > just after the version/release, and "eRcOmM".
          > > >
          > > > The last 2 bytes (or, maybe just the last byte) differ: "00
          6D"
          > in
          > > > 2.3R24, and "00 B9" in 2.3R25. Maybe this is some sort of a
          > > > checksum??? (of this 16-byte block of data?)
          > > >
          > > > - Paulb
        • Jim Buzbee
          ... Does anyone know if reboot can load a new image via tftp much like the wrt54g? This saved my butt when I loaded a bad firmware on the wrt54g... Jim ...
          Message 4 of 6 , Aug 10, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, paulbart1234 wrote:

            > Yes, I believe redboot is built on eCos (redboot being a self-
            > contained loader, it uses eCos as its mini-OS for loading Linux)


            Does anyone know if reboot can load a new image via tftp much like the
            wrt54g? This saved my butt when I loaded a bad firmware on the wrt54g...

            Jim


            >
            > - Paulb
            >
            > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "joule360" <joule360@y...> wrote:
            > > You will note that 'strings' run on the .bin firmware file does
            > > find "eCos", btw - I wondered about that because the nslu2 is
            > > clearly running a linux kernel and not an ecos kernel. But,
            > redboot
            > > is part of the eCos project, so maybe that's why.
            > >
            > > nl
            > >
            > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "rwhitby" <list.yahoo@r...>
            > > wrote:
            > > > I just realised that "eRcOmM" is "ecm" and "ROM" interleaved.
            > > >
            > > > A redboot.ecm file is discussed here:
            > > http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-
            > > > 2.0/ref/rebuilding-redboot.html
            > > >
            > > > -- Rod
            > > >
            > > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "paulbart1234"
            > <paulbart@b...>
            > > > wrote:
            > > > > I've now got 2 update images (version 2.3 release 24, and
            > > version
            > > > > 2.3 release 25), so can compare.
            > > > >
            > > > > Here's the magic 16 bytes at the end of each:
            > > > >
            > > > > 2.3R24:
            > > > > 00 01 00 00 23 24 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00
            > 6D ....#$��eRcOmM.m
            > > > >
            > > > > 2.3R25:
            > > > > 00 01 00 00 23 25 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 B9 .
            > > > > ...#%��eRcOmM.�
            > > > >
            > > > > So, as (I think) Brian Lantz pointed out, there's some version
            > > info
            > > > > here ("23 24" and "23 25" look like the firmware version ("23
            > =
            > > > > 2.3") and release.
            > > > >
            > > > > Most of the rest of the info is identical between versions:
            > the
            > > > > first 4 bytes ("00 01 00 00" (=64K, if that matters)), the "90
            > > F7"
            > > > > just after the version/release, and "eRcOmM".
            > > > >
            > > > > The last 2 bytes (or, maybe just the last byte) differ: "00
            > 6D"
            > > in
            > > > > 2.3R24, and "00 B9" in 2.3R25. Maybe this is some sort of a
            > > > > checksum??? (of this 16-byte block of data?)
            > > > >
            > > > > - Paulb
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >

            --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Jim Buzbee "I was gratified to be able to
            jbuzbee@... answer promptly, and I did. I
            http://batbox.org said I didn't know." Mark Twain
          • paulbart1234
            I know that redboot can load images via tftp, but I think you d need serial port terminal access in order to enable the built-in monitor (which would allow you
            Message 5 of 6 , Aug 10, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              I know that redboot can load images via tftp, but I think you'd need
              serial port terminal access in order to enable the built-in monitor
              (which would allow you to tftp files)

              - Paulb
              --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, Jim Buzbee <jbuzbee@n...> wrote:
              > On Tue, 10 Aug 2004, paulbart1234 wrote:
              >
              > > Yes, I believe redboot is built on eCos (redboot being a self-
              > > contained loader, it uses eCos as its mini-OS for loading Linux)
              >
              >
              > Does anyone know if reboot can load a new image via tftp much like
              the
              > wrt54g? This saved my butt when I loaded a bad firmware on the
              wrt54g...
              >
              > Jim
              >
              >
              > >
              > > - Paulb
              > >
              > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "joule360" <joule360@y...>
              wrote:
              > > > You will note that 'strings' run on the .bin firmware file
              does
              > > > find "eCos", btw - I wondered about that because the nslu2 is
              > > > clearly running a linux kernel and not an ecos kernel. But,
              > > redboot
              > > > is part of the eCos project, so maybe that's why.
              > > >
              > > > nl
              > > >
              > > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "rwhitby"
              <list.yahoo@r...>
              > > > wrote:
              > > > > I just realised that "eRcOmM" is "ecm" and "ROM" interleaved.
              > > > >
              > > > > A redboot.ecm file is discussed here:
              > > > http://ecos.sourceware.org/docs-
              > > > > 2.0/ref/rebuilding-redboot.html
              > > > >
              > > > > -- Rod
              > > > >
              > > > > --- In nslu2-linux@yahoogroups.com, "paulbart1234"
              > > <paulbart@b...>
              > > > > wrote:
              > > > > > I've now got 2 update images (version 2.3 release 24, and
              > > > version
              > > > > > 2.3 release 25), so can compare.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Here's the magic 16 bytes at the end of each:
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 2.3R24:
              > > > > > 00 01 00 00 23 24 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00
              > > 6D ....#$÷eRcOmM.m
              > > > > >
              > > > > > 2.3R25:
              > > > > > 00 01 00 00 23 25 90 F7 65 52 63 4F 6D 4D 00 B9 .
              > > > > > ...#%÷eRcOmM.¹
              > > > > >
              > > > > > So, as (I think) Brian Lantz pointed out, there's some
              version
              > > > info
              > > > > > here ("23 24" and "23 25" look like the firmware version
              ("23
              > > =
              > > > > > 2.3") and release.
              > > > > >
              > > > > > Most of the rest of the info is identical between
              versions:
              > > the
              > > > > > first 4 bytes ("00 01 00 00" (=64K, if that matters)),
              the "90
              > > > F7"
              > > > > > just after the version/release, and "eRcOmM".
              > > > > >
              > > > > > The last 2 bytes (or, maybe just the last byte)
              differ: "00
              > > 6D"
              > > > in
              > > > > > 2.3R24, and "00 B9" in 2.3R25. Maybe this is some sort of
              a
              > > > > > checksum??? (of this 16-byte block of data?)
              > > > > >
              > > > > > - Paulb
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > > Yahoo! Groups Links
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              > >
              >
              > -------------------------------------------------------------------
              -------------
              > Jim Buzbee "I was gratified to be able
              to
              > jbuzbee@n... answer promptly, and I did. I
              > http://batbox.org said I didn't know." Mark
              Twain
            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.