|
Hello Chris, thank you for your comments.
You are right about how the bootloader and the protected boot addresses work.
It is also correct that two different versions of the same compiler (even the same compiler, because some things like the optimization features can be enabled or not) will produce different hex codes and both of them will work as intended. My initial doubt was about if the mcp project was the source used to build the SharpSky_4550.hex or if it was used for other firmware release.
I believe that this .mcp doesn’t correspond to the SharpSky_4550.hex, because compiling that project doesn’t produce (at least for me) a .hex code that works properly with my board, as the SharpSky_4550.hex does.
Anyway, before going to do any modification to the code (that job will be a long trip for me…), my first two problems are that I can’t make the bootloader function works as intended (pressing the pushbutton and turning on the controller) and that I’m not sure if the .mcp file reflects the current firmware code or not.
When I program the PIC 18F4550 with the SharpSky_4550.hex file, all things work perfectly (manual control, usb communication to an ASCOM enabled program like MaximDL and Focusmax, temperature compensation) and only the bootloader function doesn’t work.
I’m not sure if the SharpSky_4550.hex supports the usb bootloader or not or if I’m doing something wrong.
So, summarizing my very long (and surely confusing comment, remember that I don’t speak English…) my two questions are:
_ Does the SharpSky_4550.hex support the usb bootloader feature?
_ Was the .mcp file the project file used to build that .hex code?
My best regards,
Ernesto.
|