Groups > comp.os.msdos.programmer > #4456 > unrolled thread

Base85 for DOS

Started by	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
First post	2024-08-20 08:28 +0100
Last post	2024-08-24 18:34 +0200
Articles	20 on this page of 42 — 5 participants

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.msdos.programmer

  Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-20 08:28 +0100
    Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-20 12:21 +0100
      Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-20 17:10 +0100
        Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-22 13:44 +0100
          Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-22 17:52 +0100
            Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-22 18:34 +0100
              Re: Base85 for DOS JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> - 2024-08-23 14:32 +0700
                Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-23 09:16 +0100
                Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-23 09:18 +0100
                  Re: Base85 for DOS JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> - 2024-08-24 05:36 +0700
                    undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-24 09:47 +0100
                      Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> - 2024-08-25 00:18 +0700
                        Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-24 21:37 +0100
                          Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-25 09:37 +0100
                            Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> - 2024-08-25 15:59 +0700
                              Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-25 10:34 +0100
                                Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-25 11:20 +0100
                                  Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> - 2024-08-26 01:44 +0700
                                    Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-26 13:24 +0100
                                      Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-27 08:12 +0100
                                        Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> - 2024-08-28 09:17 +0700
                                          Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-28 08:53 +0100
                                            Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-28 09:22 +0100
                                              Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-09-02 14:13 +0100
                                                Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-07-15 15:23 +0100
                                                  Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-07-16 11:54 +0100
                                                    Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> - 2026-07-17 21:49 -0400
                                                      Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-07-29 20:43 +0100
                                                        Re: undump tool Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-07-30 03:54 +0800
                                                        Re: undump tool Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-07-30 04:04 +0800
                                                    Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2026-07-29 20:58 +0100
                Re: Base85 for DOS wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> - 2024-08-23 14:44 +0200
                  Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-23 20:17 +0100
                    Re: Base85 for DOS wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> - 2024-08-23 23:00 +0200
                      Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-24 08:38 +0100
                        Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-09-07 14:18 +0100
                    Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-24 08:15 +0100
                      Re: Base85 for DOS wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> - 2024-08-24 10:13 +0200
                        Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-24 14:14 +0100
                          Re: Base85 for DOS wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> - 2024-08-24 18:18 +0200
                        Re: Base85 for DOS "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> - 2024-08-24 14:32 +0100
                          Re: Base85 for DOS wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> - 2024-08-24 18:34 +0200

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →

#4486 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	JJ <jj4public@outlook.com>
Date	2024-08-28 09:17 +0700
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<1l6p0ew98c6iy$.gu2sheh9gr05$.dlg@40tude.net>
In reply to	#4485

On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:12:15 +0100, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> Last chance: could it be that in your environment ds<>es? - here's the same
> code with a push pop at the start & a few more exits if run out of text..

No. It wouldn't be a DOS compatible system if DS!=ES at COM program startup.
So, same result in Windows XP. And I did tested it.

> 1E07B43F B5FDBAC3 01CD2191 E3F989D7 89D65781 3D2D6474 06B03EF2 AEE354B0
> 0AF2AEE3 26B020F2 AEE3208A 05473C30 7226244F D43788C2 8A054724 4FD43788
> D4D51088 04464974 0FE2E05A 89F129D1 43B440CD 214BEBAA 3C2075ED 380574BF
> EBE74E6F 74206120 64626720 66696C65 0D0A245A BA6201B4 09CD21C3

This one works but still require the `->` custom marker, which I don't want,
because it won't work for standard DEBUG dump from anyone.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4487 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-08-28 08:53 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20240828085342.16f1c94c5aa1b26c2066f428@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4486

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:17:20 +0700
JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:12:15 +0100, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > Last chance: could it be that in your environment ds<>es? - here's the same
> > code with a push pop at the start & a few more exits if run out of text..
> 
> No. It wouldn't be a DOS compatible system if DS!=ES at COM program startup.
> So, same result in Windows XP. And I did tested it.
> 
> > 1E07B43F B5FDBAC3 01CD2191 E3F989D7 89D65781 3D2D6474 06B03EF2 AEE354B0
> > 0AF2AEE3 26B020F2 AEE3208A 05473C30 7226244F D43788C2 8A054724 4FD43788
> > D4D51088 04464974 0FE2E05A 89F129D1 43B440CD 214BEBAA 3C2075ED 380574BF
> > EBE74E6F 74206120 64626720 66696C65 0D0A245A BA6201B4 09CD21C3
> 
> This one works

Phew! 


> but still require the `->` custom marker, which I don't want,
> because it won't work for standard DEBUG dump from anyone.


Oh dear. I felt sure I'd catered for that. 
So I just tested, yup, it's OK here.



-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4488 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-08-28 09:22 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20240828092202.a48507d15d2467c0c8caa5cf@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4487

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 08:53:42 +0100
"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:17:20 +0700
> JJ <jj4public@outlook.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, 27 Aug 2024 08:12:15 +0100, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > > Last chance: could it be that in your environment ds<>es? - here's the same
> > > code with a push pop at the start & a few more exits if run out of text..
> > 
> > No. It wouldn't be a DOS compatible system if DS!=ES at COM program startup.
> > So, same result in Windows XP. And I did tested it.

Well something was different - ah well, we got there.
> > 
> > > 1E07B43F B5FDBAC3 01CD2191 E3F989D7 89D65781 3D2D6474 06B03EF2 AEE354B0
> > > 0AF2AEE3 26B020F2 AEE3208A 05473C30 7226244F D43788C2 8A054724 4FD43788
> > > D4D51088 04464974 0FE2E05A 89F129D1 43B440CD 214BEBAA 3C2075ED 380574BF
> > > EBE74E6F 74206120 64626720 66696C65 0D0A245A BA6201B4 09CD21C3
> > 
> > This one works
> 
> Phew! 
> 
> 
> > but still require the `->` custom marker, which I don't want,
> > because it won't work for standard DEBUG dump from anyone.
> 
> 
> Oh dear. I felt sure I'd catered for that. 
> So I just tested, yup, it's OK here.
> 
> 
The prog tests the first 2 chars of the input for '-d',
if so it is deemed to be a DOS DEBUG file, if not a scan for '>' is
performed to "check" for a GRDB one. if neither it puts out an error
message. 
It is then assumed that the remaining lines of input are of
format:

[prelude][space] [set of hex pairs] [double space] [other stuff to eol]

where:
[prelude] is typically segaddr:offset but must have no embedded
spaces.
 
[set of hex pairs] is e.g. [01 02 03 04-AB CD ..] with either space or '-'
between the pairs (anything <'0' actually).

[other stuff to eol] *can* contain spaces, the prog just skips
until LF seen

{-q should get ignored}

Given that you have a H2B prog and 'debug' you can see for yourself the
simplicity of the code.

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4489 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-09-02 14:13 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20240902141300.30fdf957d543b9b4a4a4851b@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4488

On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:22:02 +0100
"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

[]



Now scans for a '-' prompt (skips a '>' if it's next) then allows
for spaces between the prompt and 'd'/'D'.

134 bytes

->          d 100 l86
16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FD-BA 86 01 CD-21 91 E3 68-89 D7 89 D6  .?......!..h....
16B1:0110 57 B0 2D F2-AE 75 55 80-3D 3E 75 02-47 49 B0 20  W.-..uU.=>u.GI. 
16B1:0120 F3 AE 0A 45-FF 3C 64 75-E8 B0 0A F2-AE E3 28 83  ...E.<du......(.
16B1:0130 C7 09 83 E9-09 76 20 8A-05 47 3C 30-72 24 24 4F  .....v ..G<0r$$O
16B1:0140 D4 37 88 C2-8A 05 47 24-4F D4 37 88-D4 D5 10 88  .7....G$O.7.....
16B1:0150 04 46 49 74-02 E2 E0 5A-89 F1 29 D1-43 B4 40 CD  .FIt...Z..).C.@.
16B1:0160 21 C3 3C 20-75 EF 38 05-74 BF EB E9-5A BA 75 01  !.< u.8.t...Z.u.
16B1:0170 B4 09 CD 21-C3 4E 6F 74-20 61 20 64-62 67 20 66  ...!.Not a dbg f
16B1:0180 69-6C 65 0D 0A-24                                ile..$
->          q


Avoids address by moving di ptr +9 after lf. (grdb outputs last line can
put a '-' between the address and 1st hex, scanning for a space missed
that pair).

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4554 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2026-07-15 15:23 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20260715152359.065802e19ad1f4329c845e7e@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4489

On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 14:13:00 +0100
"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:22:02 +0100
> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> 
> []
> 
> 
> 
> Now scans for a '-' prompt (skips a '>' if it's next) then allows
> for spaces between the prompt and 'd'/'D'.
> 
> 134 bytes
> 
> ->          d 100 l86
> 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FD-BA 86 01 CD-21 91 E3 68-89 D7 89 D6  .?......!..h....
> 16B1:0110 57 B0 2D F2-AE 75 55 80-3D 3E 75 02-47 49 B0 20  W.-..uU.=>u.GI. 
> 16B1:0120 F3 AE 0A 45-FF 3C 64 75-E8 B0 0A F2-AE E3 28 83  ...E.<du......(.
> 16B1:0130 C7 09 83 E9-09 76 20 8A-05 47 3C 30-72 24 24 4F  .....v ..G<0r$$O
> 16B1:0140 D4 37 88 C2-8A 05 47 24-4F D4 37 88-D4 D5 10 88  .7....G$O.7.....
> 16B1:0150 04 46 49 74-02 E2 E0 5A-89 F1 29 D1-43 B4 40 CD  .FIt...Z..).C.@.
> 16B1:0160 21 C3 3C 20-75 EF 38 05-74 BF EB E9-5A BA 75 01  !.< u.8.t...Z.u.
> 16B1:0170 B4 09 CD 21-C3 4E 6F 74-20 61 20 64-62 67 20 66  ...!.Not a dbg f
> 16B1:0180 69-6C 65 0D 0A-24                                ile..$
> ->          q
> 
> 
> Avoids address by moving di ptr +9 after lf. (grdb outputs last line can
> put a '-' between the address and 1st hex, scanning for a space missed
> that pair).
> 
Revisited - std si as input ptr, di for output

->          d 100 l80
16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FE-BA 80 01 CD-21 91 E3 59-52 89 D6 89  .?......!..YR...
16B1:0110 D7 81 3C 2D-64 74 07 AC-3C 3E E0 FB-E3 3F AC 3C  ..<-dt..<>...?.<
16B1:0120 0A E0 FB E3-2B AC 3C 20-E0 FB E3 24-81 3C 20 20  ....+.< ...$.<  
16B1:0130 74 EC AC 3C-30 72 17 3C-46 77 13 24-4F D4 37 88  t..<0r.<Fw.$O.7.
16B1:0140 C2 AC 24 4F-D4 37 88 D4-D5 10 AA 49-74 02 E2 DC  ..$O.7.....It...
16B1:0150 5A 89 F9 29-D1 43 B4 40-CD 21 4B EB-A3 5A BA 66  Z..).C.@.!K..Z.f
16B1:0160 01 B4 09 CD-21 C3 4E 6F-74 20 61 20-64 62 67 20  ....!.Not a dbg 
16B1:0170 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30-32 36 0D 0A  file..$MJ 2026..
->          q

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4555 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2026-07-16 11:54 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20260716115419.db72576a767ac119034a2344@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4554

On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:23:59 +0100
"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 14:13:00 +0100
> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:22:02 +0100
> > "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> > 
> > []
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > Now scans for a '-' prompt (skips a '>' if it's next) then allows
> > for spaces between the prompt and 'd'/'D'.
> > 
> > 134 bytes
> > 
> > ->          d 100 l86
> > 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FD-BA 86 01 CD-21 91 E3 68-89 D7 89 D6  .?......!..h....
> > 16B1:0110 57 B0 2D F2-AE 75 55 80-3D 3E 75 02-47 49 B0 20  W.-..uU.=>u.GI. 
> > 16B1:0120 F3 AE 0A 45-FF 3C 64 75-E8 B0 0A F2-AE E3 28 83  ...E.<du......(.
> > 16B1:0130 C7 09 83 E9-09 76 20 8A-05 47 3C 30-72 24 24 4F  .....v ..G<0r$$O
> > 16B1:0140 D4 37 88 C2-8A 05 47 24-4F D4 37 88-D4 D5 10 88  .7....G$O.7.....
> > 16B1:0150 04 46 49 74-02 E2 E0 5A-89 F1 29 D1-43 B4 40 CD  .FIt...Z..).C.@.
> > 16B1:0160 21 C3 3C 20-75 EF 38 05-74 BF EB E9-5A BA 75 01  !.< u.8.t...Z.u.
> > 16B1:0170 B4 09 CD 21-C3 4E 6F 74-20 61 20 64-62 67 20 66  ...!.Not a dbg f
> > 16B1:0180 69-6C 65 0D 0A-24                                ile..$
> > ->          q
> > 
> > 
> > Avoids address by moving di ptr +9 after lf. (grdb outputs last line can
> > put a '-' between the address and 1st hex, scanning for a space missed
> > that pair).
> > 
> Revisited - std si as input ptr, di for output
> 
> ->          d 100 l80
> 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FE-BA 80 01 CD-21 91 E3 59-52 89 D6 89  .?......!..YR...
> 16B1:0110 D7 81 3C 2D-64 74 07 AC-3C 3E E0 FB-E3 3F AC 3C  ..<-dt..<>...?.<
> 16B1:0120 0A E0 FB E3-2B AC 3C 20-E0 FB E3 24-81 3C 20 20  ....+.< ...$.<  
> 16B1:0130 74 EC AC 3C-30 72 17 3C-46 77 13 24-4F D4 37 88  t..<0r.<Fw.$O.7.
> 16B1:0140 C2 AC 24 4F-D4 37 88 D4-D5 10 AA 49-74 02 E2 DC  ..$O.7.....It...
> 16B1:0150 5A 89 F9 29-D1 43 B4 40-CD 21 4B EB-A3 5A BA 66  Z..).C.@.!K..Z.f
> 16B1:0160 01 B4 09 CD-21 C3 4E 6F-74 20 61 20-64 62 67 20  ....!.Not a dbg 
> 16B1:0170 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30-32 36 0D 0A  file..$MJ 2026..
> ->          q
> 

Problem will occur on reread after 64k/78(ll) *16 (bytes per line) of
input, so max com file that can be reconstructed with this code is ~12k.

I'm working on it.


-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4556 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid>
Date	2026-07-17 21:49 -0400
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<87mrvpcbji.fsf@atr2.ath.cx>
In reply to	#4555

"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:

>> Revisited - std si as input ptr, di for output
>> 
>> ->          d 100 l80
>> 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FE-BA 80 01 CD-21 91 E3 59-52 89 D6 89  .?......!..YR...
>> 16B1:0110 D7 81 3C 2D-64 74 07 AC-3C 3E E0 FB-E3 3F AC 3C  ..<-dt..<>...?.<
>> 16B1:0120 0A E0 FB E3-2B AC 3C 20-E0 FB E3 24-81 3C 20 20  ....+.< ...$.<  
>> 16B1:0130 74 EC AC 3C-30 72 17 3C-46 77 13 24-4F D4 37 88  t..<0r.<Fw.$O.7.
>> 16B1:0140 C2 AC 24 4F-D4 37 88 D4-D5 10 AA 49-74 02 E2 DC  ..$O.7.....It...
>> 16B1:0150 5A 89 F9 29-D1 43 B4 40-CD 21 4B EB-A3 5A BA 66  Z..).C.@.!K..Z.f
>> 16B1:0160 01 B4 09 CD-21 C3 4E 6F-74 20 61 20-64 62 67 20  ....!.Not a dbg 
>> 16B1:0170 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30-32 36 0D 0A  file..$MJ 2026..
>> ->          q
Why not post the source code? It's easier than entering text directly
into debug (if that is indeed what you're doing).

-- 
PGP Key ID: 781C A3E2 C6ED 70A6 B356  7AF5 B510 542E D460 5CAE
       "The Internet should always be the Wild West!"

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4557 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2026-07-29 20:43 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20260729204309.a6587529c688cd20ec56cca9@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4556

On Fri, 17 Jul 2026 21:49:05 -0400
jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> wrote:

> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
> 
> >> Revisited - std si as input ptr, di for output
> >> 
> >> ->          d 100 l80
> >> 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FE-BA 80 01 CD-21 91 E3 59-52 89 D6 89  .?......!..YR...
> >> 16B1:0110 D7 81 3C 2D-64 74 07 AC-3C 3E E0 FB-E3 3F AC 3C  ..<-dt..<>...?.<
> >> 16B1:0120 0A E0 FB E3-2B AC 3C 20-E0 FB E3 24-81 3C 20 20  ....+.< ...$.<  
> >> 16B1:0130 74 EC AC 3C-30 72 17 3C-46 77 13 24-4F D4 37 88  t..<0r.<Fw.$O.7.
> >> 16B1:0140 C2 AC 24 4F-D4 37 88 D4-D5 10 AA 49-74 02 E2 DC  ..$O.7.....It...
> >> 16B1:0150 5A 89 F9 29-D1 43 B4 40-CD 21 4B EB-A3 5A BA 66  Z..).C.@.!K..Z.f
> >> 16B1:0160 01 B4 09 CD-21 C3 4E 6F-74 20 61 20-64 62 67 20  ....!.Not a dbg 
> >> 16B1:0170 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30-32 36 0D 0A  file..$MJ 2026..
> >> ->          q
> Why not post the source code? It's easier than entering text directly
> into debug (if that is indeed what you're doing).
> 
erm that's what this tool is supposed to do!

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4559 — Re: undump tool

From	Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
Date	2026-07-30 03:54 +0800
Subject	Re: undump tool
Message-ID	<HTsaS.1903$UXf1.1439@fx03.ams4>
In reply to	#4557

On 30/07/2026 3:43 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2026 21:49:05 -0400
> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
>>
>>>> Revisited - std si as input ptr, di for output
>>>>
>>>> ->          d 100 l80
>>>> 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FE-BA 80 01 CD-21 91 E3 59-52 89 D6 89  .?......!..YR...
>>>> 16B1:0110 D7 81 3C 2D-64 74 07 AC-3C 3E E0 FB-E3 3F AC 3C  ..<-dt..<>...?.<
>>>> 16B1:0120 0A E0 FB E3-2B AC 3C 20-E0 FB E3 24-81 3C 20 20  ....+.< ...$.<
>>>> 16B1:0130 74 EC AC 3C-30 72 17 3C-46 77 13 24-4F D4 37 88  t..<0r.<Fw.$O.7.
>>>> 16B1:0140 C2 AC 24 4F-D4 37 88 D4-D5 10 AA 49-74 02 E2 DC  ..$O.7.....It...
>>>> 16B1:0150 5A 89 F9 29-D1 43 B4 40-CD 21 4B EB-A3 5A BA 66  Z..).C.@.!K..Z.f
>>>> 16B1:0160 01 B4 09 CD-21 C3 4E 6F-74 20 61 20-64 62 67 20  ....!.Not a dbg
>>>> 16B1:0170 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30-32 36 0D 0A  file..$MJ 2026..
>>>> ->          q
>> Why not post the source code? It's easier than entering text directly
>> into debug (if that is indeed what you're doing).
>>
> erm that's what this tool is supposed to do!
> 

I don't begrudge people their hobbies.  HEX code used to be
distributed in physical DOS magazines now and then.  I think
I only encountered it once, and managed to type it and and get
it to work.  Unfortunately, I had no idea how to learn any of
it, because I was a country boy and didn't have access to a
good library with DOS programming books.


Why not let people distribute their code in binary hex?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4560 — Re: undump tool

From	Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid>
Date	2026-07-30 04:04 +0800
Subject	Re: undump tool
Message-ID	<W0taS.11657$1xtd.2570@fx01.ams4>
In reply to	#4557

On 30/07/2026 3:43 AM, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Fri, 17 Jul 2026 21:49:05 -0400
> jayjwa <jayjwa@atr2.ath.cx.invalid> wrote:
> 
>> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> writes:
>>
>>>> Revisited - std si as input ptr, di for output
>>>>
>>>> ->          d 100 l80
>>>> 16B1:0100 B4 3F B5 FE-BA 80 01 CD-21 91 E3 59-52 89 D6 89  .?......!..YR...
>>>> 16B1:0110 D7 81 3C 2D-64 74 07 AC-3C 3E E0 FB-E3 3F AC 3C  ..<-dt..<>...?.<
>>>> 16B1:0120 0A E0 FB E3-2B AC 3C 20-E0 FB E3 24-81 3C 20 20  ....+.< ...$.<
>>>> 16B1:0130 74 EC AC 3C-30 72 17 3C-46 77 13 24-4F D4 37 88  t..<0r.<Fw.$O.7.
>>>> 16B1:0140 C2 AC 24 4F-D4 37 88 D4-D5 10 AA 49-74 02 E2 DC  ..$O.7.....It...
>>>> 16B1:0150 5A 89 F9 29-D1 43 B4 40-CD 21 4B EB-A3 5A BA 66  Z..).C.@.!K..Z.f
>>>> 16B1:0160 01 B4 09 CD-21 C3 4E 6F-74 20 61 20-64 62 67 20  ....!.Not a dbg
>>>> 16B1:0170 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30-32 36 0D 0A  file..$MJ 2026..
>>>> ->          q
>> Why not post the source code? It's easier than entering text directly
>> into debug (if that is indeed what you're doing).
>>
> erm that's what this tool is supposed to do!
> 

I don't begrudge people their hobbies.  HEX code used to be
distributed in physical DOS magazines now and then.  I think
I only encountered it once, and managed to type it and and get
it to work.  Unfortunately, I had no idea how to learn any of
it, because I was a country boy and didn't have access to a
good library with DOS programming books.


Why not let people distribute their code in binary hex?
-- 
Johann | email: invalid -> com | http://www.myrkraverk.com/blog/
I'm not from the Internet, I just work there. | via Easynews.com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4558 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2026-07-29 20:58 +0100
Subject	Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS
Message-ID	<20260729205808.8089cf5fdcdbaa9666312139@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4555

On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 11:54:19 +0100
"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Wed, 15 Jul 2026 15:23:59 +0100
> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> 
> > On Mon, 2 Sep 2024 14:13:00 +0100
> > "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> > 
> > > On Wed, 28 Aug 2024 09:22:02 +0100
> > > "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> > > 
> > > []
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > Now scans for a '-' prompt (skips a '>' if it's next) then allows
> > > for spaces between the prompt and 'd'/'D'.
>
> 
> Problem will occur on reread after 64k/78(ll) *16 (bytes per line) of
> input, so max com file that can be reconstructed with this code is ~12k.
> 
> I'm working on it.
> 
Needed extra code taking it beyond 80h bytes, so I added some help in. 
tested OK on reconstructing a 143k text dump back to 40k

-d 100 l100
0C6A:0100  BA AB 01 80 3E 83 00 3F-74 7F 31 ED B4 3F B5 FD   ....>..?t.1..?..
0C6A:0110  CD 21 91 E3 74 89 D6 89-D7 B3 1F AC 49 3C 2D 74   .!..t.......I<-t
0C6A:0120  09 4B 4B AC 3C 3E E0 FB-75 70 AC 3C 20 E1 FB 3C   .KK.<>..up.< ..<
0C6A:0130  64 75 67 AC 3C 3A E0 FB-83 C6 05 83 E9 05 3A 04   dug.<:........:.
0C6A:0140  74 4C AC 3C 30 72 1B 3C-46 77 17 09 ED 74 12 88   tL.<0r.<Fw...t..
0C6A:0150  05 95 24 4F D4 37 30 F7-75 F5 8A 25 D5 10 AA 31   ..$O.70.u..%...1
0C6A:0160  C0 95 E2 DA 31 F6 89 F9-29 D1 50 53 B3 01 B4 40   ....1...).PS...@
0C6A:0170  CD 21 B4 3F 4B B5 FD CD-21 91 5B 58 E3 0F 29 F1   .!.?K...!.[X..).
0C6A:0180  01 D6 89 D7 EB B8 BA 9A-01 B4 09 CD 21 C3 01 DE   ............!...
0C6A:0190  29 D9 77 AA F7 D9 89 CE-EB CC 4E 6F 74 20 61 20   ).w.......Not a 
0C6A:01A0  64 62 67 20 66 69 6C 65-0D 0A 24 55 73 61 67 65   dbg file..$Usage
0C6A:01B0  20 69 73 3A 0D 0A 20 75-6E 64 65 62 75 67 3C 73    is:.. undebug<s
0C6A:01C0  72 63 2E 64 6D 70 3E 6F-75 74 2E 63 6F 6D 0D 0A   rc.dmp>out.com..
0C6A:01D0  0A 20 6F 72 0D 0A 0A 20-75 6E 64 65 62 75 67 20   . or... undebug 
0C6A:01E0  2D 3F 0D 0A 5B 73 68 6F-77 73 20 74 68 69 73 20   -?..[shows this 
0C6A:01F0  6D 73 67 5D 0D 0A 24 4D-4A 20 32 30 32 36 0D 0A   msg]..$MJ 2026..
-q

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4465

From	wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at>
Date	2024-08-23 14:44 +0200
Message-ID	<vaa075$tj46$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#4462

On 23/08/2024 09:32, JJ asked:

> BTW, was there a tool specifically for converting DEBUG's dump to binary? Or
> converting it to a series of DEBUG's Edit command?

back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
but we had no internet so it was never published.
you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
"HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.

this task is/was that easy and short...
so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.
__
wolfgang

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4466

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-08-23 20:17 +0100
Message-ID	<20240823201759.ec620f49efa79d1260d9f3b8@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4465

On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:44:20 +0200
wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:

> On 23/08/2024 09:32, JJ asked:
> 
> > BTW, was there a tool specifically for converting DEBUG's dump to binary? Or
> > converting it to a series of DEBUG's Edit command?
> 
> back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
> I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
> but we had no internet so it was never published.
> you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
> "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.
> 
> this task is/was that easy and short...
> so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.


The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.

I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
for me to just CnP a debug dump.

I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
prog that does both.
-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4467

From	wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at>
Date	2024-08-23 23:00 +0200
Message-ID	<vaat9i$11v5i$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#4466

On 23/08/2024 21:17, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
...
>> back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
>> I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
>> but we had no internet so it was never published.
>> you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
>> "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.

>> this task is/was that easy and short...
>> so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.

> The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
> display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.

depending on file size limits part of the address field may be useful, 
and the ASCII trail were just ignored by hex2bin.

> I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
> for me to just CnP a debug dump.

your style is readable for me (after eye recovers from wrong treatment).

> I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
> prog that does both.

AFAIR early DOS had debug.com, later vsn debug.exe.
hex_dump options were a bit different.

my OS contains only bin2hex as part of the implied debug+disass.
the address field vary with the chosen range and always show ASCII:

xxxx_xxxx 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07  08 09 0a 0b 0c 0d 0e 0f 8+1+8 chars.
so line length is 71 or 76 which fit into 80 char screens and .nws too.
__
wolfgang

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4470

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-08-24 08:38 +0100
Message-ID	<20240824083848.135ebdb7db71a3ef8899d7a5@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4467

On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 23:00:32 +0200
wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:

> On 23/08/2024 21:17, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> ...
> >> back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
> >> I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
> >> but we had no internet so it was never published.
> >> you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
> >> "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.
> 
> >> this task is/was that easy and short...
> >> so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.
> 
> > The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
> > display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.
> 
> depending on file size limits part of the address field may be useful, 
> and the ASCII trail were just ignored by hex2bin.

You have to code for it, or maybe you'd pick up displayed valid hex codes

> 
> > I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
> > for me to just CnP a debug dump.
> 
> your style is readable for me (after eye recovers from wrong treatment).
> 
> > I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
> > prog that does both.
> 
> AFAIR early DOS had debug.com, later vsn debug.exe.
> hex_dump options were a bit different.

My xxd-r allows for both grdb and debug.exe dumps. I haven't tested it
under earlier DOS versions with possibly different dump format.

> 
> my OS contains only bin2hex as part of the implied debug+disass.
> the address field vary with the chosen range and always show ASCII:
:           1         2         3         4         5         6
> 0123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789
> xxxx_xxxx 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07  08 09 0a 0b 0c 0d 0e 0f 8+1+8 chars.
> so line length is 71 or 76 which fit into 80 char screens and .nws too.

I think xxd-r should handle that; it relies on there being 16 (hex pairs
+blank) +1 per line. Hmm, I should count pairs, not cols.

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4491

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-09-07 14:18 +0100
Message-ID	<op.2tqck1usg5icyz@myeee900>
In reply to	#4470

On Sat, 24 Aug 2024 08:38:48 +0100, Kerr-Mudd, John <admin@127.0.0.1>  
wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 23:00:32 +0200
> wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:
>
>> On 23/08/2024 21:17, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> ...
>> >> back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
>> >> I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
>> >> but we had no internet so it was never published.
>> >> you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
>> >> "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.
>>
>> >> this task is/was that easy and short...
>> >> so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.
>>
>> > The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
>> > display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.
>>
>> depending on file size limits part of the address field may be useful,
>> and the ASCII trail were just ignored by hex2bin.
>
> You have to code for it, or maybe you'd pick up displayed valid hex codes
>
>>
>> > I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
>> > for me to just CnP a debug dump.
>>
>> your style is readable for me (after eye recovers from wrong treatment).
>>
>> > I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
>> > prog that does both.
>>
>> AFAIR early DOS had debug.com, later vsn debug.exe.
>> hex_dump options were a bit different.
>
> My xxd-r allows for both grdb and debug.exe dumps. I haven't tested it
> under earlier DOS versions with possibly different dump format.
>
>>
>> my OS contains only bin2hex as part of the implied debug+disass.
>> the address field vary with the chosen range and always show ASCII:
> :           1         2         3         4         5         6
>> 0123456789012345678901234567890123456789012345678901234567890123456789
>> xxxx_xxxx 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07  08 09 0a 0b 0c 0d 0e 0f 8+1+8 chars.
>> so line length is 71 or 76 which fit into 80 char screens and .nws too.

> I think xxd-r should handle that; it relies on there being 16 (hex pairs
> +blank) +1 per line. Hmm, I should count pairs, not cols.
>
My latest won't cater for that format; it assumes that a double space  
implies end of hex pairs; it would fail in the middle of your output.

Counting down pairs might be better, but needs more coding to handle a  
short line at the end.


-- 
Bah, and indeed, Humbug

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4469

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-08-24 08:15 +0100
Message-ID	<20240824081519.bb631257a8ebf24f8285a44e@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4466

On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 20:17:59 +0100
"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:44:20 +0200
> wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:
> 
> > On 23/08/2024 09:32, JJ asked:
> > 
> > > BTW, was there a tool specifically for converting DEBUG's dump to binary? Or
> > > converting it to a series of DEBUG's Edit command?
> > 
> > back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
> > I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
> > but we had no internet so it was never published.
> > you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
> > "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.
> > 
> > this task is/was that easy and short...
> > so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.
> 
> 
> The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
> display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.
> 
> I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
> for me to just CnP a debug dump.
> 
> I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
> prog that does both.

Just Hex2Bin for debug typists!

BAC301B93CFEB43FCD2191E3F489D689D757AC3C30720E244FD43730F375054F
8A25D510AAE2EB5A89F929D143B440CD214BEBCF

(Is OK up to 62k, I think, might have problem with larger files if size
odd, I haven't tested it- prog desn't allow for hex pair to be split over
read boundary)

 e.g. 
hex2bin <hex2bin.hex >newh2bin.com

I *think* one can do 

debug hex2bin.com
e100 <Paste hex string>
rcx 34 (check!)
w
q

(might be an input limit in debug, if so do CnP in smaller bits)



Both : hex1a  (-d for dump, else assume input is display hex)

B43FB552BAC301CD2191E3F989D6BF855457803E8300647529ACD41086E02704
F01440AA4384F375F380E3BF7504B80D0AABE2E55AB30189F929D1B440CD214B
EBBEAC3C30721709ED741288C295244FD43730F775F588D4D510AA31C095E2E2
EBD2


So latest Base85a

B43FB9C86EBAC301CD2191E3F989D689D701CFB355803E830064744E31C0ABAB
BF757557AD86E095AD86E089C209E8750A80F9047205B07AAAEB1C51B9040052
31D295F7F39558F7F39250E2F252B105580421AAE2FA5983E90477C85AB30101
F929D1B440CD214BEB96B87575ABABAA9757803C7A750931C0ABAB46E2F4E3DC
5131ED31D2B90500AC2C21721298505295F7E39558F7E301D55A01C283D500E2
E79586E0AB9286E0AB5983E90577C3EBAB


-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4471

From	wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at>
Date	2024-08-24 10:13 +0200
Message-ID	<vac4ni$1anso$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#4469

On 24/08/2024 09:15, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 20:17:59 +0100
> "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> 
>> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:44:20 +0200
>> wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:
>>
>>> On 23/08/2024 09:32, JJ asked:
>>>
>>>> BTW, was there a tool specifically for converting DEBUG's dump to binary? Or
>>>> converting it to a series of DEBUG's Edit command?
>>>
>>> back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
>>> I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
>>> but we had no internet so it was never published.
>>> you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
>>> "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.
>>>
>>> this task is/was that easy and short...
>>> so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.
>>
>>
>> The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
>> display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.
>>
>> I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
>> for me to just CnP a debug dump.
>>
>> I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
>> prog that does both.
> 
> Just Hex2Bin for debug typists!
> 
> BAC301B93CFEB43FCD2191E3F489D689D757AC3C30720E244FD43730F375054F
> 8A25D510AAE2EB5A89F929D143B440CD214BEBCF
> 
> (Is OK up to 62k, I think, might have problem with larger files if size
> odd, I haven't tested it- prog desn't allow for hex pair to be split over
> read boundary)
> 
>   e.g.
> hex2bin <hex2bin.hex >newh2bin.com
> 
> I *think* one can do
> 
> debug hex2bin.com
> e100 <Paste hex string>
> rcx 34 (check!)
> w
> q
> 
> (might be an input limit in debug, if so do CnP in smaller bits)

could work, but I'm afraid there is a much smaller size limit.

> Both : hex1a  (-d for dump, else assume input is display hex)

> B43FB552BAC301CD2191E3F989D6BF855457803E8300647529ACD41086E02704
> F01440AA4384F375F380E3BF7504B80D0AABE2E55AB30189F929D1B440CD214B
> EBBEAC3C30721709ED741288C295244FD43730F775F588D4D510AA31C095E2E2
> EBD2

> So latest Base85a
> 
> B43FB9C86EBAC301CD2191E3F989D689D701CFB355803E830064744E31C0ABAB
> BF757557AD86E095AD86E089C209E8750A80F9047205B07AAAEB1C51B9040052
> 31D295F7F39558F7F39250E2F252B105580421AAE2FA5983E90477C85AB30101
> F929D1B440CD214BEB96B87575ABABAA9757803C7A750931C0ABAB46E2F4E3DC
> 5131ED31D2B90500AC2C21721298505295F7E39558F7E301D55A01C283D500E2
> E79586E0AB9286E0AB5983E90577C3EBAB

even space(s) saved ...it's much harder to read than B4 3F B9 C8 6E
and for odd file size just fill up with NOP or SPACE until 512 bounds.
__
wolfgang

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4473

From	"Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1>
Date	2024-08-24 14:14 +0100
Message-ID	<20240824141412.c019381b9be3d73a70235303@127.0.0.1>
In reply to	#4471

On Sat, 24 Aug 2024 10:13:38 +0200
wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:

> On 24/08/2024 09:15, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 20:17:59 +0100
> > "Kerr-Mudd, John" <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Fri, 23 Aug 2024 14:44:20 +0200
> >> wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 23/08/2024 09:32, JJ asked:
> >>>
> >>>> BTW, was there a tool specifically for converting DEBUG's dump to binary? Or
> >>>> converting it to a series of DEBUG's Edit command?
> >>>
> >>> back then (~1984..) there were several tools available.
> >>> I wrote one 1985  as a DOS-extender,
> >>> but we had no internet so it was never published.
> >>> you may find a lot of later attempts from many sources now:
> >>> "HEX2BIN" or similar names with .ASM,.OBJ,.COM or even .EXE.
> >>>
> >>> this task is/was that easy and short...
> >>> so whenever needed this few bytes can be written any time.
> >>
> >>
> >> The 'problem' with debug output is that it has address prefixes and
> >> display values at the end that need stripping out to get pure hex.
> >>
> >> I could post code in hex, if that's more acceptable - it's just easier
> >> for me to just CnP a debug dump.
> >>
> >> I did hex2bin and v versa a while back; OK I'll revisit it to have a
> >> prog that does both.
> > 
> > Just Hex2Bin for debug typists!
> > 
> > BAC301B93CFEB43FCD2191E3F489D689D757AC3C30720E244FD43730F375054F
> > 8A25D510AAE2EB5A89F929D143B440CD214BEBCF
> > 
> > (Is OK up to 62k, I think, might have problem with larger files if size
> > odd, I haven't tested it- prog desn't allow for hex pair to be split over
> > read boundary)
> > 
> >   e.g.
> > hex2bin <hex2bin.hex >newh2bin.com
> > 
> > I *think* one can do
> > 
> > debug hex2bin.com
> > e100 <Paste hex string>
> > rcx 34 (check!)
> > w
> > q
> > 
> > (might be an input limit in debug, if so do CnP in smaller bits)
> 
> could work, but I'm afraid there is a much smaller size limit.
> 
> > Both : hex1a  (-d for dump, else assume input is display hex)
> 
> > B43FB552BAC301CD2191E3F989D6BF855457803E8300647529ACD41086E02704
[...]

> even space(s) saved ...it's much harder to read than B4 3F B9 C8 6E
> and for odd file size just fill up with NOP or SPACE until 512 bounds.

Would you prefer a version that puts a space every 4 pairs? (106 bytes)

B43FB552 BAC301CD 2191E3F9 89D6BF8A 5457803E 83006475 31ACD410 86E02704
F01440AA 4384F375 F3F6C307 7503B020 AA80E3BF 7504B80D 0AABE2DD 5AB30189
F929D1B4 40CD214B EBB6AC3C 30721709 ED741288 C295244F D43730F7 75F588D4
D510AA31 C095E2E2 EBD2


(More spaces=more lines!)

-- 
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#4475

From	wolfgang kern <nowhere@never.at>
Date	2024-08-24 18:18 +0200
Message-ID	<vad14l$1f0au$1@dont-email.me>
In reply to	#4473

On 24/08/2024 15:14, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
...
>> even space(s) saved ...it's much harder to read than B4 3F B9 C8 6E
>> and for odd file size just fill up with NOP or SPACE until 512 bounds.

> Would you prefer a version that puts a space every 4 pairs? (106 bytes)

> B43FB552 BAC301CD 2191E3F9 89D6BF8A 5457803E 83006475 31ACD410 86E02704
> F01440AA 4384F375 F3F6C307 7503B020 AA80E3BF 7504B80D 0AABE2DD 5AB30189
> F929D1B4 40CD214B EBB6AC3C 30721709 ED741288 C295244F D43730F7 75F588D4
> D510AA31 C095E2E2 EBD2

my personal preference is based on the limited eyesight and familiarity 
with bytes in hex format. But I could live with quads as well :)
__
wolfgang

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 Next page →

csiph-web

Base85 for DOS

Contents

#4486 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4487 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4488 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4489 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4554 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4555 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4556 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4557 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4559 — Re: undump tool

#4560 — Re: undump tool

#4558 — Re: undump tool (was: Re: Base85 for DOS

#4465

#4466

#4467

#4470

#4491

#4469

#4471

#4473

#4475