Actually, I've not looked for the document at the microchip site http://www.microchip.com if you do, please email me the links to the appropriate information so I can post it for others? BTY: have you looked at Programming an '877 with a stripped down Tait (basically a cable) under Linux by Byron A Jeff http://techref.massmind.org/microchip/16F877/taitlinux.htm --- James Newton mailto:jamesnewton@geocities.com 1-619-652-0593 http://techref.massmind.org NEW! FINALLY A REAL NAME! Members can add private/public comments/pages ($0 TANSTAAFL web hosting) -----Original Message----- From: Stan Ockers [mailto:ockers@anl.gov] Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 09:33 To: jamesnewton Subject: RE: COM84 programmer Importance: Low RE: COM84 programmer 4/6/00 Thanks. Do you know if the ISP specs are in the general 87X data sheet or some other document? Stan James Newton wrote: >I was thinking that you could try the schematic with a bigger socket (i.e. >connect to the same pins on the '877...) and yes, you would have to modify >the program... or create your own. The ISP programming specification is >available from Microchip > >I can't see the small versions of each picture but the large ones look nice. > >--- >James Newton mailto:jamesnewton@geocities.com 1-619-652-0593 >http://techref.massmind.org NEW! FINALLY A REAL NAME! >Members can add private/public comments/pages ($0 TANSTAAFL web hosting) > > >-----Original Message----- >From: Stan Ockers [mailto:ockers@anl.gov] >Sent: Thursday, April 06, 2000 09:22 >To: jamesnewton >Subject: RE: COM84 programmer >Importance: Low > > > RE: COM84 programmer 4/6/00 > >James Newton wrote: >>You'll never know until you try it. >> >>P.S. I'm not responsible if you do and the chip fries. >> >You mean try the 16F87X in the COM84? The socket doesn't have enough pins >to start with. Indications from Byron on the list are that the software >should be changed slightly. Also, I don't have the source to PIX. > >I am just starting to write a description of what I've done in case anyone >asks for it. I'm enclosing two pictures that shows what it looks like. >Could you let me know if they come through O.K.? Is the resolution good >enough? I tried to make the files as small as I could and still be useful. > >Stan > > >RFC822 header >----------------------------------- > > Received: from dns2.anl.gov ([130.202.20.3]) by horus.et.anl.gov >(8.6.11/8.6.11) with ESMTP id LAA26532 for ; Thu, 6 Apr >2000 11:23:49 -0500 > Received: from smtp2.san.rr.com (smtp2.san.rr.com [24.25.195.39]) by >dns2.anl.gov (8.9.1a/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA27427 for ; Thu, 6 >Apr 2000 11:23:49 -0500 (CDT) > Received: from a ([204.210.50.240]) by smtp2.san.rr.com > (Post.Office MTA v3.5.3 release 223 ID# 0-0U10L2S100V35) > with SMTP id com for ; > Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:22:40 -0700 > Reply-To: > From: "James Newton" > To: "Stan Ockers" > Subject: RE: COM84 programmer > Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2000 09:22:01 -0700 > Message-ID: <001d01bf9fe4$3cdf72e0$0100a8c0@a.efplus.com> > MIME-Version: 1.0 > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > X-Priority: 3 (Normal) > X-MSMail-Priority: Normal > X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0 > In-Reply-To: <200004061617.LAA20473@pop.et.anl.gov> > X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V4.72.3155.0 > Importance: Normal > Content-Type: text/plain; > charset="iso-8859-1" > Content-Length: 1400 > Status: >