stooo already got a broken 3G, but IIRC that one may indeed be too broken for hunting JTAG, if it even exists. I seriously doubt they were that dumb once again...
Taylor Gordon schrieb: > I agree. Unless of course someone is willing to donate a 3G to stooo for > JTAG'ing :) > > On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 4:41 PM, Cory Walker <cwalke...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> It's been confusing to keep track of everyone that's willing to build a >> nanotron. There's been multiple people willing try try their hand at >> building one but I haven't heard back from them. I think it would be best >> if >> everyone who can build a 3G nanotron post here to keep everything in the >> same spot. Building a nanotron is really all we can do unless another >> suitable vulnerability is found. >> >> Peace >> >> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 2:01 PM, Taylor Gordon <tgcodeproje...@gmail.com >>> wrote: >>> " It could of course be possible that there was some bug within the >>> nanotron hardware or software that made it fail, but that's unlikely >>> either. >>> " >>> >>> Not so unlikely I think :P Honestly, (we know who was running it..) >> wasn't >>> clear what he was doing with the thing. In fact, at first I think he left >>> the instruction note in the note folder, which also could have messed it >>> up... >>> >>> But I haven't seen him in a while, to get into contact with him. >>> >>> Bottom line - I think we should take another shot at the nanotrons. Won't >>> hurt. >>> >>> Taylor >>> >>> On Fri, Jan 15, 2010 at 3:56 PM, The Seven <these...@gmx.net> wrote: >>> >>>> Honestly, I don't really have a clue what to do about the 3G problem. I >>>> can't think of a way how this thing could escape a nanotron, but it >>>> obviously did. >>>> It could of course be possible that there was some bug within the >>>> nanotron hardware or software that made it fail, but that's unlikely >>>> either. >>>> So the only thing I could think of that may actually help is build yet >>>> another nanotron and have it attack another nano. And if this still >>>> fails, we may want to try a different firmware revision. >>>> >>>> Do you have the neccessary hardware and tools to build one? Mindstorms >>>> seems to work quite well, but the arduino-based solution should work, >>>> too, like most other microcontrollers. Actually, a few servos or >>>> solenoids, some transistors, and a serial port in bitbanging mode might >>>> work, too. >>>> >>>> Keanen Shaw schrieb: >>>>> Hey people, since I'm on the mailing list I thought it would be >>>> appropriate >>>>> for me to actually say something without you blokes ignoring it. So, >>> for >>>> the >>>>> last time, I have an iPod Nano 3G that I can run any kind of test on >>> you >>>>> want. It is pretty much disposable, as I have no way to use it now >> that >>>> I'm >>>>> running Puppy Linux. Anyone want to say "nice to know" or "we'll keep >>> in >>>>> touch"? I'm not going to deal with this bullshit anymore. >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Linux4nano-dev mailing list >>>>> Linux4nano-dev@gna.org >>>>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev >>>>> http://www.linux4nano.org >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Linux4nano-dev mailing list >>>> Linux4nano-dev@gna.org >>>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev >>>> http://www.linux4nano.org >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Linux4nano-dev mailing list >>> Linux4nano-dev@gna.org >>> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev >>> http://www.linux4nano.org >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> Linux4nano-dev mailing list >> Linux4nano-dev@gna.org >> https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev >> http://www.linux4nano.org >> > _______________________________________________ > Linux4nano-dev mailing list > Linux4nano-dev@gna.org > https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev > http://www.linux4nano.org > _______________________________________________ Linux4nano-dev mailing list Linux4nano-dev@gna.org https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/linux4nano-dev http://www.linux4nano.org
