ORIGINAL WorkBench checksums

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by Foul

maybe we can add crc checksums for kickstart roms ? it would be cool.

I Agree with prowler... it would be better done in a separate thread (not by me, sorry... I really wouldn't have the time).
You are the second one asking it (see my old post http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=...&postcount=113), so I suppose it's a "popular demand" and could be useful indeed.

However, there's already something similar; the following table contains information about all known Kickstart ROMs:
http://kickstartrevival.dynalias.com/kickstart.html

[Foul]

yeah ! nice link !! favorites : add

thx

[prowler]

Originally Posted by Supamax

...the following table contains information about all known Kickstart ROMs:
http://kickstartrevival.dynalias.com/kickstart.html

Thanks for the link, Supamax!

I've not seen that before.

[rhester72]

Unfortunately the site (read: my virtual server) is a bit flaky, sorry about that. Working on it. =)

Rodney

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by rhester72

Unfortunately the site (read: my virtual server) is a bit flaky, sorry about that. Working on it. =)

Rodney

Hi Rodney... WOW! So you're the author/webmaster!!
There's a lot of work behind it!! My deepest compliments

[Foul]

http://www.whdload.de/whdload/kick.txt

Maybe it could be usefull

[cosmicfrog]

any idea when your site will be back up rhester72 ??

all I get is

We're sorry, but this site is down for maintenance at this time.

Please try again later.

[prowler]

Originally Posted by cosmicfrog

all I get is

We're sorry, but this site is down for maintenance at this time.

Please try again later.

Looks like I grabbed the info just in time, then!

Hey Cosmic,

Since you're online, would you like me to upload it to the Zone for you?

[cosmicfrog]

No I`m ok but really wheres the separate thread about KS roms

[prowler]

Originally Posted by cosmicfrog

...wheres the separate thread about KS roms

There isn't one... yet. Would you like to start it?

[cosmicfrog]

not me got a Cybervision 64/3D thats going keep me busy

[prowler]

Oh yes. Good luck with that!

[rhester72]

Originally Posted by cosmicfrog

any idea when your site will be back up rhester72 ??

all I get is

We're sorry, but this site is down for maintenance at this time.

Please try again later.

(Late) Tonight.

Rodney

[rhester72]

Originally Posted by Supamax

Hi Rodney... WOW! So you're the author/webmaster!!
There's a lot of work behind it!! My deepest compliments

Danke.

It's grossly lacking in updates (for _years_, really), but anyone I've ever contacted about giving it a permanent home/updating it has seemed extremely serious sincere/serious and then flaked out. C'est la vie.

There's actually a lot of good information available by clicking on the column headers that usually goes unnoticed.

Rodney

[prowler]

Originally Posted by rhester72

There's actually a lot of good information available by clicking on the column headers that usually goes unnoticed.

Thanks. I didn't try that (didn't want to read some boring definition of the header, as is usual).

Will try it (late) tonight, then!

BTW, you really should add the above quoted note to the main page, or the information will continue to go unnoticed.

[cosmicfrog]

I`m sure someone round here will host it for you if you ask nicely, try asking on the IRC channel

[Foul]

i got many ftp space .. i can put files on it ... no prob ..

[prowler]

Originally Posted by prowler

@Supamax,

I've just received a Workbench 3.0 disk set and manual which I won on eBay at the weekend.

The Install disk has a home-made label which carries the description "HD INSTALL Version 3.0" and part number "370137", and not "Install Disk Version 3.0" and "370126-02", respectively, as on twizzle's disk, illustrated in this post:
http://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p=538137&postcount=17

The Install disk in the set I've just bought has the checksum $853DECFF, which is different from those reported by twizzle and asm1 for their disks in this thread:
http://eab.abime.net/showthread.php?t=44344
However, the disk's files have consistent time and date stamps as revealed by the Shell which suggests that the disk has not been modified and nothing suspicious is evident in the disk image either.

Twizzle has sent me the restored .ADF image of his Install 3.0 disk for comparison with my disk from the above set. I will report my findings when this is complete.

Originally Posted by prowler

@cosmicfrog,

Having analyzed the disks you sent me, I can confirm that:

(1) two of The Very First disks have original checksums, and the third is a slightly modified version of an original disk,

(2) one of the Extras 1.3 disks has an original checksum, and the other is a greatly modified version of an original disk, and

(3) the Extras 1.3.3 disk has an original checksum.

I have not yet been able to confirm whether the Workbench 1.3.3 disk is original or not. There are differences between your disk and mine, but I cannot yet tell which of the two is more original.

I can restore the modified The Very First and Extras 1.3 disks, but, since I can read all your disks without error, I am not able to tell which of them you regard as faulty.

The Workbench 1.3.3 disk dilemma I hope to resolve in the next few days.

@cosmicfrog,

Your Workbench 1.3.3 disk is likely more original than mine.

I have compared the AmigaDOS filesystems and the only discrepancy is the datestamp on the .info file (file contents were compared).

The .info file datestamp on your disk is 19-May-89 11:14:38 and on my disk it is 21-Jan-94 11:06:34, which post-dates all the files and directories on the disk.

There are a few other miscellaneous byte-for-byte discrepancies in the disk images, but nothing which affects the boot sector, volume information or filesystem (boot sector and volume information is identical).

I will restore the modified The Very First and Extras 1.3 disks for you, but the rest I will leave alone.

@Supamax,

The checksum $A7CF56D0 for my Workbench 1.3.3 disk, Rev. 34.34, English, A500/A2000, P/N 317789-04 should be deleted from the master table and replaced with the more likely checksum $0C842649 for cosmicfrog's disk, but this remains unverified until confirmed by another user.

[Supamax]

Originally Posted by prowler

@Supamax,

The checksum $A7CF56D0 for my Workbench 1.3.3 disk, Rev. 34.34, English, A500/A2000, P/N 317789-04 should be deleted from the master table and replaced with the more likely checksum $0C842649 for cosmicfrog's disk, but this remains unverified until confirmed by another user.

Thank you for all your contributions, Peter, they are precious as always .
And... sorry if it's been a while since my last update to the master list. As soon as I have some spare time I'll update it with all the last posts...

P.S. it would be better if I could use a simpler format for the list itself, because every time I have to update it means a little pain in the ass .
It's particularly upsetting to edit it and check alignment after every little update.
What do you think if I uploaded it in .pdf format?
It would be easier fo me to update it (for example using Microsoft Word) and then save it as .pdf...
BUT, doing this, the list itself would have less visibility: it would need to be opened in order to be viewed .

Any ideas/suggestions for an alternate format? I would gladly use .txt, but it doesn't support colors, bold/italics etc.

[prowler]

Originally Posted by Supamax

Thank you for all your contributions, Peter, they are precious as always .
And... sorry if it's been a while since my last update to the master list. As soon as I have some spare time I'll update it with all the last posts...

You're welcome, mate. It's just a pity that it's so time-consuming and I'm always so busy.

Originally Posted by Supamax

P.S. it would be better if I could use a simpler format for the list itself, because every time I have to update it means a little pain in the ass .
It's particularly upsetting to edit it and check alignment after every little update.
What do you think if I uploaded it in .pdf format?
It would be easier fo me to update it (for example using Microsoft Word) and then save it as .pdf...
BUT, doing this, the list itself would have less visibility: it would need to be opened in order to be viewed .

Any ideas/suggestions for an alternate format? I would gladly use .txt, but it doesn't support colors, bold/italics etc.

I have no objection to viewing it in .pdf format. I would hope that most users will be able to open .pdf files by now. Only HTML would be more universal and almost as easy to maintain.