3 ms·
I’m not happy that this change has happened; however, since learning about how the BOOTSEL mode works under the hood I’ve been expecting news like this from one
by timemachine 4y ago
I’m not happy that this change has happened; however, since learning about how the BOOTSEL mode works under the hood I’ve been expecting news like this from one of the big two OS vendors.
While a sleek looking use case on the surface, mounting the PI as a fake, non-standards compliant, mass storage device is just a hack.
- fps-hero 4y agoIt may be a hack but it isn’t a new idea. MBed DAPlink has had drag and drop programming for a long time. The STlink programmer also does this, so do the Segger J-links.
- fragmede 4y agoI'm not sure which part of the standard you think they're violating but the Pi is presenting itself as a USB device. One that accepts a (limited) number of blocks of data, and can respond with blocks of data. Drag and drop to program isn't the same thing as flashing an EPROM on a chip burner like we're still back in the 80's, but that's because time's moved on since then.
- catiopatio 4y ago> I'm not sure which part of the standard you think they're violating The part where you're not supposed return a successful Command Status claiming a write succeeded, when actually, you're dropping writes — to anything but a few specific blocks, and only if you see those writes in the order you expect — on the floor.
- fragmede 4y agoOh whew, that's just some layer 7 concerns. I'd be interested in seeing where that's (that it must actually write those blocks) actually defined by in the spec and what language they use. I was worried my Pico was sending invalid blocks that didn't properly parse and was relying on undefined behavior to implement flashing.