| Re: [hatari-devel] Drive image byteswap confusion |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-devel Archives
]
- To: hatari-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-devel] Drive image byteswap confusion
- From: Uwe Seimet <Uwe.Seimet@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2019 18:47:43 +0200
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; t=1571590063; s=strato-dkim-0002; d=seimet.de; h=In-Reply-To:References:Message-ID:Subject:To:From:Date: X-RZG-CLASS-ID:X-RZG-AUTH:From:Subject:Sender; bh=yIfOZajWeOVPEmKm2hGyWxwZGtVA5c8Wb/wLN21PDqw=; b=PDI2Veh2xeUoAOpQ3lO7RkOm4Cg0Nvd7eMg3G2SAeUQNwlEFsI2FFqwYeNFrAtTPGF py7YXY9fXbpUyqKGADHNODVGqZUAyFDteuEs0ILQvbGULd11B6mNZNrTrmjECe91jsJv dn1Wure4bHv2sP8ayM3lOk4r1briUufEQ0y8I3FahC+yC/hpXi5IhIgIlT3lK8TiQphN 2NRmYvfMOs6pmOlF0vBN7jsdCJIKunALnOs41b7Rv02lDGmRe90TZkxhLpT8ofK+vYb1 cLOS6i9xZ13IZs5Pu2NL6BC5hObBrSlbrYUGjHZeOnTxkv96oTkNin61lBrSwtKLU8fL s90Q==
Hi,
> > I just noticed that the actual byte order Hatari uses appears to
> > depend on the TOS version. Can it be that when running TOS 4.04 the
> > resulting byte order differs from the one used with TOS 3.06?
>
> We do not have any checks for TosVersion in ide.c ... so no idea where
> this could come from. Is it reproducible? Can you provide exact steps
> how to reproduce it?
I'm afraid I currently can't because with TOS 4.04 I get this assertion
again:
hatari: /var/tmp/portage/media-libs/portaudio-19.06.00-r1/work/portaudio/src/hostapi/alsa/pa_linux_alsa.c:3636: PaAlsaStreamComponent_BeginPolling: Assertion `ret == self->nfds' failed.
What I think I found is that in Falcon mode (with TOS 4.04) the byte
order is handled differently from TT mode (with TOS 3.06). There's
something else that's strange, probably a bug in Aranym, but it might
also be related to Hatari: https://github.com/aranym/aranym/issues/45.
I've been stumbling upon all kinds of strange or at least intransparent
issues related to drive images.
Best regards
Uwe