[Arm-netbook] Flashing the NAND

[luke.leighton]

On Sun, Dec 8, 2013 at 4:42 PM, Christopher Thomas
<christopher at firemothindustries.com> wrote:
>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> On Dec 8, 2013, at 4:30 AM, "luke.leighton" <luke.leighton at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>> As I wrote in another email in this thread, the fact you didn’t now about me
>>> until now is a symptom of the opaque and structureless nature of this
>>> community.
>>
>> there's people continuously joining, aaron, even now, and they don't
>> necessarily all read every message.    example: i still don't know if
>> david and christopher are aware that there's been a second [announced]
>> change to the EOMA68 specification. i had to contact you off-list in
>> order to prompt them of a mistake they'd made by not reading the spec
>> (wrong I2C address for the EEPROM).
>
> If you're referring to the change from address 0x50 to something else.

 there was no change from address 0x50 to something else.  the address
has always been 0x51.  there was at one point some repetition of the
(industry-wide) confusion over what constitutes an "address" in I2C,
however that was cleared up.  even without that clarification, the
address has always been 0x51.

> Then yes, the address is 0x54.

 0x51.  as listed in the specification, and as shown on the example schematic:

 http://elinux.org/Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture/EOMA-68#Requirements_for_I2C

 as you were designing the schematics in private as a proprietary
product - without the possibility of peer review - may i recommend
that you double-check the Improv schematics, chris?

 also, the second change that was made, after joe kindly investigated
and brought it to my attention, was made on the 10th november, after
some considerable discussion and a number of requests for
clarification:

 http://elinux.org/index.php?title=Embedded_Open_Modular_Architecture%2FEOMA-68&diff=299384&oldid=291854

 i did not hear from you chris, so i assumed that you were watching
the list and had seen that modification to the standard, and that
Improv Daughter Boards have taken that change into account?

i've been thinking that it may be appropriate to have a separate list
(low-traffic by now) for EOMA68 (and other standards), just in case
people are not properly paying attention at this critical phase before
the standard is declared final.  it already is... sort-of - but things
like the RGB pinout change are ruled by "reality", where "reality" is
defined by "what the very first CPU Card in the series is actually
capable of".

l.