Jump to content

Photo

Atari Rev B PAL Rom file


45 replies to this topic

#1 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:02 AM

After a bit of work, have finally got a rev B Pal rom complete with the floating point routines.
The rom file that generally comes the emulators is ntsc and has a few changes in it which i believe was to do with the translator disk for the XL.
Eg; don't write to $D301, don't check for special carts.

I am blessed with both atari original Rev A and Rev B source listings so was easy to find and fix the changes.
Also having 2 different local hacked versions of rev B was the most help :)

James

Attached Files



#2 Rybags OFFLINE  

Rybags

    Quadrunner

  • 15,720 posts
  • Location:Australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:04 AM

But... was there ever a Rev A PAL ROM to begin with?

#3 carmel_andrews OFFLINE  

carmel_andrews

    Quadrunner

  • 13,297 posts
  • Location:from somewhere, anywhere and no where

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:05 AM

Already got one...i leeched it from the pigwa.net ftp site....they have all the A8 bioses there (can't remember the full web address though)

#4 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:19 AM

Yes. checkout
http://www.atariage....00#entry1712834
That is rev A PAL, just like the 400 and 2 800's I have here, right down to the same chip part numbers.
Rev B didn't come out till early 82. Am sure atari had Computers here before then.

James


But... was there ever a Rev A PAL ROM to begin with?



#5 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:23 AM

Would be interested to see it. It may or maynot be completly orignal.

James

Already got one...i leeched it from the pigwa.net ftp site....they have all the A8 bioses there (can't remember the full web address though)



#6 carmel_andrews OFFLINE  

carmel_andrews

    Quadrunner

  • 13,297 posts
  • Location:from somewhere, anywhere and no where

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:27 AM

Here you go

Attached Files


Edited by carmel_andrews, Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:29 AM.


#7 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:28 AM

Where?

James

Here you go



#8 Rybags OFFLINE  

Rybags

    Quadrunner

  • 15,720 posts
  • Location:Australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:29 AM

I thought it was earlier than that... in fact I had the impression it was not long after GTIA.

I have the first Atari computer I ever saw in my posession now (400 given from friend)... I think they bought it in 1981 but could have been '82.
OS has been replaced with SuperMon though.

#9 carmel_andrews OFFLINE  

carmel_andrews

    Quadrunner

  • 13,297 posts
  • Location:from somewhere, anywhere and no where

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:30 AM

I don't think this site likes uploading .rom or .rar files.....only .zip files (bloody annoying)

#10 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:43 AM

I was slightly annoyed after getting my 3rd 800, all had rev A and GTIA.
I was under the impression that we never got CTIA. Yet to see one with that chip.

James



I thought it was earlier than that... in fact I had the impression it was not long after GTIA.

I have the first Atari computer I ever saw in my posession now (400 given from friend)... I think they bought it in 1981 but could have been '82.
OS has been replaced with SuperMon though.



#11 mimo OFFLINE  

mimo

    Preppie!

  • 6,813 posts
  • It's easy living in a bubble

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:50 AM

I believe that all PAL 400/800s had GTIA.
CTIA was upgraded very early on in the computers production life (1981 iirc)

#12 carmel_andrews OFFLINE  

carmel_andrews

    Quadrunner

  • 13,297 posts
  • Location:from somewhere, anywhere and no where

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 2:59 AM

Anyone have a proper working version of the xl/xe rom...one's I have always show up as a bad rom when i use it thru an emulator (i.e shows up as red) in the self test memory test thing

i've tried the following ones

atarixl.rom (as originally came with pcxformer)
atarixlxe.rom
xe.rom
xe(pal).rom
xl.rom
Atari OS v2 83.10.05.rom
and atarixegs.rom

all show up as bad on the memory test thing

Edited by carmel_andrews, Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:01 AM.


#13 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:09 AM

That one is actually a modifyed rev B ntsc.
$E6E7 has 3 NOP's which shouldn't be there.
The timings in the sio routines are set to NTSC.
Special cart routines have been bypassed.
Key repeat timings etc.
All the mods point to a translator disk version.
Sorry to say, but that file isn't named correctly.
I have been finding that a lot with the rev B. very hard to get a true and correct version.

James


Here you go



#14 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:14 AM

Maybe you need to remove the first 6 bytes that is a dos overhead for them to work.

James



Anyone have a proper working version of the xl/xe rom...one's I have always show up as a bad rom when i use it thru an emulator (i.e shows up as red) in the self test memory test thing

i've tried the following ones

atarixl.rom (as originally came with pcxformer)
atarixlxe.rom
xe.rom
xe(pal).rom
xl.rom
Atari OS v2 83.10.05.rom
and atarixegs.rom

all show up as bad on the memory test thing



#15 ijor OFFLINE  

ijor

    River Patroller

  • 2,063 posts

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:43 AM

I have been finding that a lot with the rev B. very hard to get a true and correct version.


Hi James,

Isn't it trivial to "produce" or to confirm/verify rev. B PAL OS? We have the official source listing. The difference with the NTSC version is noted in the listing with conditional assembly, and should be something like a dozen bytes. Or I am missing something ?

#16 Kr0tki OFFLINE  

Kr0tki

    Stargunner

  • 1,120 posts
  • Location:Warszawa, Poland

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 9:06 AM

Anyone have a proper working version of the xl/xe rom...one's I have always show up as a bad rom when i use it thru an emulator (i.e shows up as red) in the self test memory test thing

Your ROMs are fine, but you have the SIO patch (or other patches) turned on.

#17 a8isa1 OFFLINE  

a8isa1

    Stargunner

  • 1,498 posts

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:21 PM

Freddy Offenga had collected authentic images a while back.

You'll find them here.

- Steve Sheppard

#18 Rybags OFFLINE  

Rybags

    Quadrunner

  • 15,720 posts
  • Location:Australia

Posted Mon Mar 30, 2009 8:38 PM

A program that uses some sort of CRC algorithm would be good. Atari-based preferable. Maybe even do it on a per 1K block basis so any differences could give an indication of what the mod might be.

Properly patched/modded ROMs would have their checksums corrected, and a modded ROM might vary from something that just defeats Attract Mode to something that includes a mini-Monitor or similar.

#19 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:25 AM

How many people out there would like to type in or verify every byte in the OS as being true and correct?
I also have the source listing and have found at least 1 byte that is in error compared to the source.
The routine is the same in rev A and compairing pal V ntsc shows the difference.

Also, there is a project that Warerat is doing that I have put up my hand for one.
I personally would like a true and correct rev B PAL version of the os to go with it.

James



I have been finding that a lot with the rev B. very hard to get a true and correct version.


Hi James,

Isn't it trivial to "produce" or to confirm/verify rev. B PAL OS? We have the official source listing. The difference with the NTSC version is noted in the listing with conditional assembly, and should be something like a dozen bytes. Or I am missing something ?




#20 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:28 AM

He doesn't have a Pal os B.
James


Freddy Offenga had collected authentic images a while back.

You'll find them here.

- Steve Sheppard



#21 Rybags OFFLINE  

Rybags

    Quadrunner

  • 15,720 posts
  • Location:Australia

Posted Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:35 AM

Stuff typing anything in... there's plenty of unmodded machines out there and people who can supply ROM images.

And since there should be no more than 4 "official" 400/800 ROMS (OS A/B, NTSC/PAL) it shouldn't be too hard to work it all out.

Pretty sure too that PAL/NTSC should have different hard-coded key repeat rates, as well as the baud-rate tables.

Edited by Rybags, Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:35 AM.


#22 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Tue Mar 31, 2009 3:25 AM

Not baud rate tables but baud adjustment values and time out values due to the different vblank rates.

James

Pretty sure too that PAL/NTSC should have different hard-coded key repeat rates, as well as the baud-rate tables.



#23 ijor OFFLINE  

ijor

    River Patroller

  • 2,063 posts

Posted Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:05 PM

How many people out there would like to type in or verify every byte in the OS as being true and correct?


I didn't mean "people" should do that.

I've been reading here that PAL rev B was very rare, considered as possibly lost or even never released. So what I meant is that it should be (almost) trivial to re-create it from the listing, even if it was never found. Of course that confirming with an actual ROM chip is very good.

I also have the source listing and have found at least 1 byte that is in error compared to the source.


What error did you find? I just compared the PAL rev B you posted with the "known" NTSC rev B. I found 11 bytes to be different. Didn't double check, but these bytes seem to be exactly the ones marked in the source.

#24 sup8pdct OFFLINE  

sup8pdct

    Dragonstomper

  • Topic Starter
  • 882 posts
  • Location:australia

Posted Wed Apr 1, 2009 1:35 AM

at ebb9 and ebc0.

Hold on, I see what is happening. I missed a conditional .IF way back in the variable define area.
It means I have missed 2 bytes that should have been changed.

All fixed

James


How many people out there would like to type in or verify every byte in the OS as being true and correct?


I didn't mean "people" should do that.

I've been reading here that PAL rev B was very rare, considered as possibly lost or even never released. So what I meant is that it should be (almost) trivial to re-create it from the listing, even if it was never found. Of course that confirming with an actual ROM chip is very good.

I also have the source listing and have found at least 1 byte that is in error compared to the source.


What error did you find? I just compared the PAL rev B you posted with the "known" NTSC rev B. I found 11 bytes to be different. Didn't double check, but these bytes seem to be exactly the ones marked in the source.

Attached Files


Edited by sup8pdct, Wed Apr 1, 2009 1:42 AM.


#25 DjayBee OFFLINE  

DjayBee

    Moonsweeper

  • 295 posts
  • Location:Stuttgart, Germany

Posted Wed Apr 1, 2009 12:17 PM

If I get it right, you guys are searching for a dump of the standard PAL B ROM?

If someone posts a tool which dumps the OS from the running system then I will try to fire up my old 400 which I did not use for 10+ years hope that it still runs and see what I get from it.

Edited by DjayBee, Wed Apr 1, 2009 12:17 PM.





0 user(s) are browsing this forum

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users