Den Thu, 2 Nov 2017 21:42:10 +0100 skrev Spiro Trikaliotis <ml-cbmhackers@trikaliotis.net>: > Hello, > > * On Thu, Nov 02, 2017 at 08:47:37PM +0100 Mia Magnusson wrote: > > > How big/small is the risk of a computer sending something else > > before pulling ATN? If I understand correctly there shouldn't be > > anything sent. Therefore we might get away with just detecting > > something similar to this activity. > > As always: It depends... > > If you assume that the Computer and the drive use the standard IEC > protocol (without burst mode), this will never happen. > > If burst mode is taken into account, SRQ will be used, but we already > know what would be send. > > However, there are many fastloader protocols, and there, you cannot > assume that nothing is send before ATN. Unfortunately, without support > for fastloaders, I do not think such a device would be very helpful. Well, the computer would be connected to the drive indefinitely if no other computer tries to access the bus. So fastloaders specific to certain software would work if the user doesen't "touch" other computers. The fastloader that should be investigated and which must work is imho JiffyDOS. -- (\_/) Copy the bunny to your mails to help (O.o) him achieve world domination. (> <) Come join the dark side. /_|_\ We have cookies. Message was sent through the cbm-hackers mailing listReceived on 2017-11-03 11:00:02
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0.