[Coco] ?PEEK(&HFF90) RETURNS 126 ON MY UNUPGRADED 26-3124?

Mark Marlette mark at cloud9tech.com
Tue Apr 24 13:57:33 EDT 2007


I don't have the data right in front of me....hold on let me check  
C-9's CVS for the mpak manual...

Nope...have to add it...

I looked at my source to the .abl code for the GAL, 26-3024 update.

The new range of the MPI is $FF40-$FF7F.

If I looked at the 3124 mod that I have already documented at home I  
could quickly figure out what it's original range was. From my web  
page it appears that the MPIs unmodified range went into the GIME's  
address space($ff90).

The peek makes sure that it is not. This si the first I have heard  
that it isn't working.

Done this MANY years ago so I don't recall.

Sorry for the slow response. Was gone over the weekend and have many  
business/list emails to reply to.



Mark Marlette wrote:

What GIME is in your CoCo?
Test performed on the same CoCo?
I'm sure I have done this test on both MPIs. Been too long ago.
At 4/21/2007 02:12 PM, you wrote:

Marks test of ?peek(&hff90) returns 255 on all of my 3024 multi-paks,
however it returned 126 on my 3124. I opened the 3124 and there is no
satellite board nor any piggy backed chips nor any mod of any kind - i
can't see that this pak has been upgraded. Does this test only work for
the 3024's? thanks - Rob

I just tried a test with a Coco3 and an MPI 3024. Without the MPI the  
PEEK returned 126 and the same with the MPI.

What are you trying to determine with this PEEK, whether the MPI was  
upgraded for Coco3 use?

More information about the Coco mailing list