Rockbox Technical Forums

Rockbox Development => New Ports => Topic started by: thomazff on March 10, 2006, 09:47:42 AM

Title: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: thomazff on March 10, 2006, 09:47:42 AM
There is this page:

http://www.mrobe.org/ (Sorry if i can't post this).

Where people with M:robe from olympus want to make a new OS or anything else than the original, or even making a new firmware.

My question is, is it possible to have rockbox on a m:robe 500?
And what would it take?


Thanks

THOMAZ
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: LinusN on March 10, 2006, 11:18:08 AM
I have no idea. Take it apart, scan the circuit boards and publish the scans somewhere. Then we may be able to tell you more.
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: tucoz on March 10, 2006, 11:45:36 AM
No need to dissassemble anything. For the neat sum of $2,950 you can buy a nice 88 page pdf with the dissassembly info ;-) http://www.teardown.com/channels/pdas/Olympus_mrobe.aspx (http://www.teardown.com/channels/pdas/Olympus_mrobe.aspx)
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: thomazff on March 11, 2006, 12:03:07 PM
By scans do you mean pictures of the inside of the mrobe?
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: keytotime on March 11, 2006, 12:09:40 PM
Yep
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: thomazff on March 11, 2006, 01:09:41 PM
Here is a link.

http://213.100.40.206/~robesync/robesync/pix/
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: keytotime on March 11, 2006, 01:14:07 PM
It's another TI
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: thomazff on March 11, 2006, 01:21:40 PM
Newbie here, could you explain this "It's another TI" for me?
Title: Re: Support for the Olympus M:Robe 500 ? Can this be done?
Post by: LinusN on March 11, 2006, 03:32:18 PM
http://www.rockbox.org/twiki/bin/view/Main/TexasInstrumentsDM320

It means that we can't port Rockbox to it since there is no free compiler for it. Sorry.
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: nopasaran on May 31, 2006, 06:53:55 PM
sorry for gravediggin but how about porting rockbox for the m:robe100 ??? It should even have portaplayer PP5020E arm7 CPU like some ipods have... on the mrobe.org forum are a few people who have some experience with asm and I believe arm asm has free compiler available everywhere...
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: saratoga on May 31, 2006, 08:13:51 PM
sorry for gravediggin but how about porting rockbox for the m:robe100 ??? It should even have portaplayer PP5020E arm7 CPU like some ipods have... on the mrobe.org forum are a few people who have some experience with asm and I believe arm asm has free compiler available everywhere...

Heh I like this:

Quote
It would be very easy, all we need to do is ask one of the Rockbox guys to reprogram the interface.

"All" we have to do is write the drivers for it  :D

But yeah, I guess its easier then starting from scratch, since some of the work is done.  Doesn't sound like anyone over there is working on it though.

Also, ASM isn't a language, its short for assembly.  Assembly is what compilers produce, so theres no need for a compiler if you're writing assembly.
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: nopasaran on June 03, 2006, 12:22:40 PM
Well of course you need to compile assembly. If you are going to write code in asm then at least you will need to translate it back into an executable format, don't you? If you write a bunch of opcodes adressing cpu registers into a text file, you can't execute it... you need to turn it into binary code. I might be talking out of my ass here... maybe I am mixing up the correct terms?
Title: Re: compile vs. assembly
Post by: blooflame on June 03, 2006, 05:19:06 PM
Just trying to make things clear..

In general, an assembler does a one-to-one translation of human-friendly opcodes into machine language (although they do allow macros and such)

A compiler generally does a one-to-many translation from a high-level languange (like C, or COBOL even) to machine language.

In the case of the GCC toolset, the compilers create assembly language as output (usually) and pass it through a GNU assembler to create machine code for the targeted system.  Doing in a two-phase approach makes it easier for cross-compiling environments to be set up.  I'm, of course, leaving out a lot of details but in general the GNU assembler is the main piece to be modified to create output for a new machine architecture.
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: saratoga on June 04, 2006, 06:05:47 PM
Well of course you need to compile assembly. If you are going to write code in asm then at least you will need to translate it back into an executable format, don't you? If you write a bunch of opcodes adressing cpu registers into a text file, you can't execute it... you need to turn it into binary code. I might be talking out of my ass here... maybe I am mixing up the correct terms?

You assemble assembly :)

Compilers generate assembly which is then assembled.  Most do it in one step, but not all.  You can actually tell gcc to compile but not assemble IIRC.
Title: C Integrated Development Environment for m:robe 500i
Post by: ts-x on July 05, 2006, 09:30:22 PM
Just saw this and thought those interested in this port might want to take a look...
http://mrobe.fan.googlepages.com/m%3Arobe500iide
Title: Re: C Integrated Development Environment for m:robe 500i
Post by: saratoga on July 05, 2006, 10:31:35 PM
Just saw this and thought those interested in this port might want to take a look...
http://mrobe.fan.googlepages.com/m%3Arobe500iide

Wait, someone already figured out how to run code on it, and wrote most the drivers?  Why hasn't he posted about it here?  Thats a good part of the work needed to get Rockbox running :)
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: ts-x on July 06, 2006, 10:39:06 AM
I'm not sure if they're aware of Rockbox or not.  I sent an email last night to mrobe.fan referring him/her here.  Even if they do make it over here, it will be kind of hard to get a handle on Rockbox with the wiki down :(.  Evil wiki destroying bastards!!!
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: Kezza on July 12, 2006, 12:30:26 AM
you can still see the wiki though googles cache.

http://www.google.com.au/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=+site:www.rockbox.org+rockbox+twiki

just click on the Cached link for each page.

Kezza
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: daurnimator on August 04, 2006, 12:35:10 PM
the dev that did that demo app, based his stuff on ArchOpen work, and medios (see gmini 40* stuff @ gmini400.com )

he is working on porting medios, which has alot of stuff.

BUT, i would like to make medios/rockbox interchangable (to an extent) - be able to have hardware registers etc in the same includes, and share them...
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: homielowe on October 06, 2006, 10:19:54 PM
mediOS now works, shirour hasn't released any files yet, also DOOM
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: drippydonut on January 01, 2007, 08:58:59 AM
The linux on the mrobe is now working well and files/info is public...
http://www.mrobe.org/forum/viewtopic.php?p=24266
http://www.engadget.com/2006/12/31/olympus-m-robe-finally-finds-its-calling-running-linux/
http://mrobefan.elwiki.com/Main_Page
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: BdN3504 on March 11, 2009, 11:37:57 AM
Just in case anybody missed the news (http://svn.rockbox.org/viewvc.cgi?view=rev;revision=20285). Thanks to Mr. Karl Kurbjun.
Title: Re: Olympus M:Robe 500
Post by: timoteorex on December 31, 2013, 10:45:07 PM
Does anyone happen yo have Opie lying around? The mrobe site is in Chinese and I don't think the file is on there anymore. It would be much appreciated! Thanks!