G9 porting progress - page 10 - DryOS Development - CHDK Forum
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 29   Go Down

G9 porting progress

  • 281 Replies
  • 151935 Views
*

Offline tcrew

  • *
  • 8
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #90 on: 07 / October / 2008, 10:04:07 »
Advertisements
Hi uvvv,
I found small problem with auto signature generation. The STUB(FF942684) in stubs_auto.S is fine for 100g but for 100d it shold be STUB(FF942614). I had no time going into detail of signature finder and I have overcome this by redefining proper location. I saw in your initial 100g versions you defined whole function so you probably hit this problem. Do you know why this particular signature (for SsPrepareSeq) is incorrectly generated?

Attaching fixed code.
Thanks
Logged
*

Offline reyalp

  • ******
  • 14125
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #91 on: 08 / October / 2008, 01:15:23 »
stubs_auto.S is generated by looking for branch calls to addresses like sub_XXXXXXXX in the inline ASM.  Change those to refer to the correct address (replace sub_FF942684 with sub_FF942614) and all should be well.
Logged
Don't forget what the H stands for.
*

Offline tcrew

  • *
  • 8
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #92 on: 08 / October / 2008, 04:43:37 »
Thanks reyalp,
It seems I found a funny bug in the signature finder. It takes only the lates BL from a line into consideration, so if there is a commented out code there will be a problem.

In the following the STUB(FF942684) is generated:
"BL      sub_FF942614\n"      //"BL      sub_FF942684_my\n" ????????   //---------->

I am not sure if it makes sense changing the signature fnder code but is good to know it behaves this way :)

Attaching fixed 100d directory, the previously sent bin file remains the same.
Thanks
Logged
*

Offline ejohnson

  • *
  • 5
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #93 on: 13 / October / 2008, 17:03:14 »
This is awesome.  I've been playing with 1.00g build all morning.  Thanks.

Quote from: bongo_bingo on 05 / October / 2008, 11:24:33
I'm not able to develop the g9's raw (I mean crw files) with any software (ufraw, taw therapee or raw hide) and sometimes  they crash.
I've been able to convert crw with dng4ps-2 using a650 profile, but the results weren't good.
Built in raw develop not always work and raw merge produce strange, unusefull grids.

Am I miss something?

I'm seeing the same thing with ufraw/dcraw.  They don't seem to handle the crw files.  With digikam (http://www.digikam.org) I get a garbled mess (basically static noise), so I'm wondering if these tools work with .CRW's.  Using the "file" command the .CRW != .CR2


  $file CRW_6573.CRW
  CRW_6573.CRW: data
  $ file IMG_6566.CR2
  IMG_6566.CR2: TIFF image data, little-endian


Any suggestions on what to try next?
Logged
*

Offline Aged

  • *
  • 39
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #94 on: 14 / October / 2008, 05:04:51 »
Quote from: ejohnson on 13 / October / 2008, 17:03:14



Any suggestions on what to try next?

The G9 is on Dave Coffin's (DCRAW) list so it would appear that he knows !
Logged
*

Offline bongo_bingo

  • ***
  • 167
    • My photos at DA
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #95 on: 14 / October / 2008, 07:06:07 »
I've ArtDen to implement g9's crw in his dng4ps, but he replyed so:

Quote from: ArtDen on 06 / October / 2008, 13:54:39
bongo_bingo, use ONLY native g9 RAW format. It contains many useful values: preview, color profile, exif values etc apart from a raw image, whereas a hacked RAW file contains only raw image from camera sensor.

I'm interested because I'm curious to see how raw merge works.

bye

P.s.: any news from jeff666?
Logged
*

Offline ejohnson

  • *
  • 5
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #96 on: 14 / October / 2008, 20:59:26 »
Quote from: Aged on 14 / October / 2008, 05:04:51
The G9 is on Dave Coffin's (DCRAW) list so it would appear that he knows !

Yeah it seems that the CRW format is very different from the CR2's.  dcraw works well with the g9's native CR2 format, so I was looking for a method of QA'ing the CRW.

In playing with time stamping I've noticed the following (sorry for the crappy image):
  http://elliottjohnson.net/repeating-timestamp.jpg

The timestamp menu also doesn't have the ability to select Label Caption, Font Size, Font Color, Alignment.  I'm not sure if this was already known, I'm just reporting what I see.

Thanks again guys.  It's been alot of fun to play with.
elliott
Logged
*

Offline Sniuk

  • *
  • 3
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #97 on: 15 / October / 2008, 07:24:25 »
Hi guys,

Just wondering, is there anyone working on the 1.00H ?
Unfortunatley I have no a clue about programing so I can't help with it,
but I can with testing.

Thanks for all work you are doing for all us :)


Logged
*

Offline bitdivision

  • *
  • 14
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #98 on: 15 / October / 2008, 11:24:09 »
hi sniuk,

I was working on 1.00H but haven't had any time recently, possibly in the next week or so I will have some time... Not sure if anyone else s working on this though...

Logged
*

Offline Sniuk

  • *
  • 3
Re: G9 porting progress
« Reply #99 on: 15 / October / 2008, 13:17:38 »
Hi bitdivision,

Glad to hear that :). Thanks.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 8 9 [10] 11 12 13 14 15 ... 29   Go Up
« previous next »
 

Related Topics


SimplePortal © 2008-2014, SimplePortal