home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!decwrl!infopiz!lupine!motcsd!mri!bill
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.m68k
- Subject: Re: S-records
- Message-ID: <1992Aug21.010523.17300@mri.com>
- From: bill@mri.com (Bill Weinberg)
- Date: 21 Aug 92 01:05:23 GMT
- Sender: bill@mri.com
- References: <l8ipdpINNlt9@atacama.cs.utexas.edu> <9722@kralizec.zeta.org.au>
- Organization: Microtec Research Inc., Santa Clara, CA
- Lines: 30
-
- In article <9722@kralizec.zeta.org.au> craig@kralizec.zeta.org.au (Craig Dewick) writes:
- >
- >One thing that has perplexed me for a long time is why both manufacturers
- >use different code storage methods? I think they must stem from early
- >microcoding days when these formats were how the microcode images were
- >set out be each company.
- >
- The origins of Intel HEX and Motorola S records have nothing to do with
- "microcode" - no one uses ASCII hex formats for work with on-chip pro-
- cessor internals.
-
- To understand the origins of competing file formats, you must realize that
- both Motorola S and Intel HEX formats were both originally developed to
- support the programming of 8-bit micros (6800 and 8008 respectively) with
- (E)PROM programmers developed in-house by the two companies. Motorola used
- to offer a programming board that went into the EXORciser* while Intel did
- the same for its development tools (I forget their names). There were almost
- no commercially available device programmers at the time (maybe Data I/O)
- and so multiple standards were free to develop in-house.
-
- Other competing ASCII/HEX formats include TEKHEX, Hitachi S records, and
- others beyond my ken.
-
-
- Bill Weinberg
- Prod Marketing Mgr
- Microtec Research Inc.
-
- *now that I think about it, Motorola supported S records with its earliest eval
- boards, like the ones with MICbug too, before the EXORcisor.
-