Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ? - page 5 - General Discussion and Assistance - CHDK Forum supplierdeeply

Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?

  • 63 Replies
  • 35207 Views
Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #40 on: 30 / January / 2008, 20:02:26 »
Advertisements
Hello!
I only need the USB remote shotter working!!!!
Is it possible to load the G7 CHDK build on a G9 and have the remote working, or it will not even run on G9???

Thanks

*

Offline PhyrePhoX

  • *****
  • 2254
  • make RAW not WAR
    • PhyreWorX
Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #41 on: 31 / January / 2008, 04:27:59 »
hi,
this thread clearly only is about g9 and its chdk development.
no, you can't use g7 chdk for g9, if it was so easy this very thread wouldnt exist :)

Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #42 on: 03 / February / 2008, 09:06:16 »
hello,

I've done everything (bin_utils & arm-elf gcc compile) to "Compiling_CHDK_under_Linux" (on wikia). But I receive the following error.

 facsiga:~# cd /home/ub/chdk/trunk/
 facsiga:/home/ub/chdk/trunk# make fir
 **** Build: 31
 >> Entering to tools
 /bin/sh: uname: command not found
 make[1]: echo: Command not found
 make[1]: *** [pakwif.o] Error 127
 make: *** [all-recursive] Error 1
 facsiga:/home/ub/chdk/trunk#

Anyone has an idea why this error occured? Thanks.

Cheers
ps: Of course the command "uname" exists and response is "Linux" and also the "echo" is functional.....
the PATH is updated to contain the "arm-elf/bin" folder also, I've "root" rights.

Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #43 on: 10 / March / 2008, 01:38:47 »
Has any progress been made on working on CHDK for the G9?
I am interested in being able to take RAW in "PC remote control" a feature which seems to have been disabled or forgotten in the remote SDK provided by Canon.
Does CHDK work when G9 is remotely operated by a PC?
Thanks,
JG
Canon G9 and EOS 1Ds owner


Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #44 on: 26 / March / 2008, 23:25:06 »
We should start a development prize for a G9 chdk port. I'd be willing to donate toward the cause.

Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #45 on: 27 / March / 2008, 04:20:19 »
Deleted
« Last Edit: 22 / April / 2008, 15:12:50 by Barney Fife »
[acseven/admin commented out: please refrain from more direct offensive language to any user. FW complaints to me] I felt it imperative to withdraw my TOTAL participation. Nobody has my permission, nor the right, to reinstate MY posts. Make-do with my quoted text in others' replies only. Bye

Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #46 on: 19 / April / 2008, 04:01:47 »
Hi all,
I've read in G9 - CHDK Wiki that my dump is not correct.
Sorry, I'm a totally beginners in this sort of things.

Is there something I can do to make a correct dump?
How can I see I've done it correctly?

I've read that another user dumped the f revision of g9, and his file was different than mine.

Can we creat a work group to accelerate the chdk porting of our beloved g9? Maybe an expert can coordinate our work

bye

chdk g9
« Reply #47 on: 19 / April / 2008, 04:08:14 »
I've just read that the other g9 f dumper is dew, and that he realized that both our dump are incorrect

G9 1.00F - zSHARE - bingo_bongo_g9_firm_vergm1_00f.7z
Well, bingo_bongo has precedence.  My dump of G9-1.00F is here: [URL removed]
I wouldn't mention this except that (1) b_b's firmware doesn't start until byte 0x09BE00 of his file, and (2) once the leading and trailing zeroes are scrubbed off, DIFF says that there's a difference between the two dumps -- though I can't get it to tell me where the difference is.  I'm wringing mine out in IDA with an eye toward porting.  Boy oh boy!  The tools have gotten way much better in the 30-plus years since I did any of this work.  (Anybody want an IBM S360AL disassembler written in FORTRAN?  I have the card deck around here somewhere . . .)

If anyone has the knowledge and the time to determine where the two dumps differ, I'd appreciate knowing.  There may be a chance the IS (Image Stabilization?) software changes independently of the "firmware version".  My camera has "IS Firm Ver. 3.00" and "IS Param Ver. 2.03".

Thanks for considering this, and thanks very much for initiating and continuing this project.

Edit 16 April:  Both my dump and bingo-bongo's are incomplete and should not be used for development.  Further work is required before the 1.00F firmware will be available.


*

Offline ewavr

  • ****
  • 1057
  • A710IS
Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #48 on: 19 / April / 2008, 04:27:23 »
I don't understand why bongo_bingo's dump is incorrect. After loading in IDA it disassembles correctly.

Quote
Is there something I can do to make a correct dump?
How can I see I've done it correctly?

Just format card before dumping and do touch (erase/write) empty.dum in dumping process.

*

Offline GrAnd

  • ****
  • 916
  • [A610, S3IS]
    • CHDK
Re: Any developers interested in working on CHDK firmware for the G9 ?
« Reply #49 on: 19 / April / 2008, 04:53:03 »
I think that notice is related to this topic- Problems with Udumper?
I'll remove that "red" notice.
CHDK Developer.

 

Related Topics