On Sat, Jun 12, 2004 at 05:21:57PM +0200, Wouter van Ooijen wrote:
> > Wouter, I need some separation clarity from you here.
> >
> > I'm clear on the LVP pin problem when programming. See my
> > other post. But are
> > you saying that there's a glitch issue when simply using a
> > HVP programmed
> > part with LVP config bit clear?
>
> Not when just running.

OK. Clear. Sounds like another point for a bootloader. And I now really
agree with the point you have in the ZPL documentation about not messing
with the 18F config bits even though they are writable.

>
> But for the argument 'but I use a HVP programmer and my image has LVP
> disabled': note that when you reprogram the part you will likely erase
> it as part of the programming process. And the erased state of the LVP
> bit is?

LVP on! As I said above I'm clear on the LVP pin problem when programming.
So the new wrinkle is ICSP. Even when doing HVP only via ICSP one must
make sure that the LVP pin doesn't float.

Crystal clear now.

Thanks,

BAJ

--
http://www.piclist.com hint: PICList Posts must start with ONE topic:
[PIC]:,[SX]:,[AVR]: ->uP ONLY! [EE]:,[OT]: ->Other [BUY]:,[AD]: ->Ads