PDA

View Full Version : Seagate ST-01/-02 BIOS at http://www.minuszerodegrees.net/rom/rom.htm not up to date



z80eu
March 22nd, 2014, 03:29 AM
Just for the records... at http://www.minuszerodegrees.net/rom/rom.htm a BIOS version 3.3 for the Seagate ST-01/ST-02 is offered.
Meanwhile I was able to identify even a newer version at http://r3tr0.de/mirror/ftp.mpoli.fi/hardware/ROM/SEAGATE/index.html ( http://r3tr0.de/mirror/ftp.mpoli.fi/hardware/ROM/SEAGATE/ST01-332.BIN ).
If you compare it byte by byte, it's not totally different, but the 3.32 has about 1KB more/additional bytes of code.

modem7
March 24th, 2014, 01:24 AM
That supposed "3.3.2" image has been brought to my attention before.

If I look at the known 3.2 image, I see "SEAGATE SCSI BIOS REVISION 3.2" at the start, and I can see lots of other text strings.
If I look at the known 3.3 image, I see "SEAGATE SCSI BIOS REVISION 3.3" at the start, and I can see lots of other text strings.

If I look at the supposed 3.3.2 image, I see something very very different. And no text strings at all !

For something that, by the ".2" suffix, is meant to be a minor upgrade to 3.3, the major content difference does not make sense.
Another question is, why aren't the first two bytes equal to 55/AA; the BIOS ROM signature bytes?

Krille
March 24th, 2014, 06:10 AM
If I look at the supposed 3.3.2 image, I see something very very different. And no text strings at all !

For something that, by the ".2" suffix, is meant to be a minor upgrade to 3.3, the major content difference does not make sense.
Another question is, why aren't the first two bytes equal to 55/AA; the BIOS ROM signature bytes?

The ROM-file is inside a gzip archive.

This is a "dump" in debug of the actual binary;


-d100
155F:0100 55 AA 0C EB 50 EB 03 EB-00 CB 33 C0 E9 ED 13 77 U...P.....3....w
155F:0110 22 53 45 41 47 41 54 45-20 53 43 53 49 20 42 49 "SEAGATE SCSI BI
155F:0120 4F 53 20 52 45 56 49 53-49 4F 4E 20 33 2E 33 2E OS REVISION 3.3.
155F:0130 32 0D 0A 21 28 43 29 20-43 6F 70 79 72 69 67 68 2..!(C) Copyrigh
155F:0140 74 20 31 39 38 38 2C 31-39 39 31 20 53 45 41 47 t 1988,1991 SEAG
155F:0150 41 54 45 0D 0A 55 0E 0E-07 1F 33 DB FA E4 21 50 ATE..U....3...!P
155F:0160 24 FE E6 21 FB BE 90 20-E8 F9 0F BE 33 00 E8 F3 $..!... ....3...
155F:0170 0F FC BA 40 00 B8 55 AA-BE 00 18 8B CA 8B FE F3 ...@..U.........


Looks legit to me. ;) I guess you were looking at the compressed file?

z80eu
March 24th, 2014, 03:11 PM
That supposed "3.3.2" image has been brought to my attention before.

If I look at the known 3.2 image, I see "SEAGATE SCSI BIOS REVISION 3.2" at the start, and I can see lots of other text strings.
If I look at the known 3.3 image, I see "SEAGATE SCSI BIOS REVISION 3.3" at the start, and I can see lots of other text strings.

If I look at the supposed 3.3.2 image, I see something very very different. And no text strings at all !

For something that, by the ".2" suffix, is meant to be a minor upgrade to 3.3, the major content difference does not make sense.
Another question is, why aren't the first two bytes equal to 55/AA; the BIOS ROM signature bytes?

You have to uncompress it first. It's a legit, working BIOS, and it contains about 1KB more code than V3.3 ... I am using it, and it supports big HDDs (above 500MB) as well.

modem7
March 25th, 2014, 12:16 AM
I guess you were looking at the compressed file?
Yes. The question is, why is a .BIN extension being used instead of .GZ


Some interesting strings:

"MATSHITALF-3000"
This could be Matshita model LF-3000. Matshita does use 'LF-' at the start of some model numbers.

"(In SQ5110 drive) SyDOS SCSI BIOS REVISION 3.3.5"
Syquest SQ5110 88MB tape drive. SCSI interface.

This may be a custom BIOS.

Tor
March 25th, 2014, 05:46 AM
Yes. The question is, why is a .BIN extension being used instead of .GZ
Must be something that mirror did. Because on the original site, mpoli.fi, the .BIN file is not compressed.

-Tor

Krille
March 25th, 2014, 07:47 AM
Yes. The question is, why is a .BIN extension being used instead of .GZ

The link ends with .BIN but the actual filename in the download dialog ends with .gz so it must be a browser quirk (I'm using IE8).

z80eu
March 25th, 2014, 11:55 AM
Meanwhile I was able to use the V3.32 (aka SyDOS SCSI BIOS V3.35) ROM directly in my ST-02.
I was not able to use a 40MB SCSI Conner drive directly - which was formatted with ROM V3.0, but after reinitializing the HDD, FDISK and FORMAT C: /S I was able to use it (and to boot etc.).

A test with a Seagate ST51080N was not successful (Format Error after a long time of waiting, everytime I boot I got the message "Drive C has not been installed, and does not contain installation software. Do you want to install this unit? (Y/N) " again and again), although I was not able to use the ST51080N with the older ROM V3.0 too ...

modem7
March 25th, 2014, 02:57 PM
The link ends with .BIN but the actual filename in the download dialog ends with .gz so it must be a browser quirk (I'm using IE8).
Must be. I just now tried IE, and the file downloads as a .gz
Back to Firefox, and the file downloads as a .BIN


I am using it,
That's good information. I have added the image to my web site.

Had no one verified operation of the image, I may have still added it to my web site, but with a caveat like, "UNTESTED - May be for custom versions of the ST02"

Tor
March 25th, 2014, 05:45 PM
I never trust browsers to download anything which needs to be checksum-correct. ROM images, executables, tar.gz, .zip I always download with wget. I just copy the link off from the browser.

-Tor

wesleyfurr
March 26th, 2014, 04:52 PM
Will this work on any version of the ST-01? I seem to recall some discussion that you had to have a later rev board to use the later BIOS?

Thanks,

Wesley

fatwizard
March 26th, 2014, 04:59 PM
I have 3.3 running on an earlier version of the board. Haven't tried this latest one yet.

PeterNC
November 8th, 2017, 08:16 AM
Recently I acquired a ST-01 with 3.3.2. Will provide an update on how it works out. Starting out with a small SCSI. Will then upgrade.