Peter Graf via Ql-Users wrote:
> Did you test your logic changes with a non-Tetroid GC inside a QL where
> the original logic did *not* work reliably?
> I'm asking, because IIRC you reported total failure of the original
> logic with the Tetroid GC, while my experience was, that non-Tetroid GC
> always basically worked, just not reliably in some QLs.

As far as I could gather in my limited tests, INGOT 5 never worked
(which includes the Tetroid) and INGOT 6 worked or at least mostly
worked. Difficult to tell because the software had a few remaining
issues, too, but I haven't been able to crash it or corrupt any data
for a few days so I consider it stable now.

> That would mean conclusions from Tetroid to non-Tetroid is not
> possible.

Original INGOT 5 GCs were tested and started to work, too. Not with
the latest logic that includes the SGC fix, but the GC fix alone
already worked for them and if anything the latest version should make
it even more stable.

> As for the daughter board, why do you want to re-design it?

Using the push-to-eject style daughter boards is a lot cheaper and
easier to do than your original design. Besides, I don't have your
original designs ;) Only problem is that the card cannot be centered
in the MDV drive with them, which bothers me a bit but is difficult to
change due to the positions of the screws. Also, dual-slot would be

> Will you upload your logic changes to the QL-SD section of Dilwyn's site?

Eventually, sure.

All the best, Marcel

QL-Users Mailing List

Reply via email to