Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.

The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.

Poppa Capp

Poppa Capp <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
<snip crap>
: Poppa Capp

X-posting idiot! Ker-PLONK!

J.

> Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
> to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
> gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.
>
> The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.
>
> Poppa Capp


Looks like it was caused by a software bug... Spirit should be fully
fixed by next week. It's already sending pictures again

The only Soviet space probe to land successfully on Mars and transmit data
did so for just 15 seconds. Considering this, the mission is already
infinitely more successful than all Soviet Mars missions put together.
Spirit isn't a write-off yet, the programmers just need to debug some flakey
code, update the rover, and it will be back in service.


"Poppa Capp" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
> to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
> gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.
>
> The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.
>
> Poppa Capp

From what I have read, it is the SOFTWARE which runs the file manager,
or caching, program for the FLASH. It is NOT the Flash memory itself,
as you so wrongly suggest. So, using another brand of FLASH would not
have made a single difference.

Apparently, NASA tested this software by running it for only 6 continuous
days. Spirit has been running, now, for a LOT longer than that.

Poppa Capp wrote:

> Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
> to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
> gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.
>
> The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, (E-Mail Removed) says...
> From what I have read, it is the SOFTWARE which runs the file manager,
> or caching, program for the FLASH. It is NOT the Flash memory itself,
> as you so wrongly suggest. So, using another brand of FLASH would not
> have made a single difference.

....and I didn't know IBM made Flash.
>
> Apparently, NASA tested this software by running it for only 6 continuous
> days. Spirit has been running, now, for a LOT longer than that.

From what I've heard it looks like a FAT-12 problem (too many files in
the root directory?).

> Poppa Capp wrote:
>
> > Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
> > to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
> > gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.
> >
> > The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.
>
>

"Peterson, David" wrote:
>
> > Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
> > to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
> > gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.
> >
> > The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.
> >
> > Poppa Capp
>
> Looks like it was caused by a software bug... Spirit should be fully
> fixed by next week. It's already sending pictures again

I wonder what kind of hardware is Spirit using for its CPU?
Has to be very low-power considering limiting power resources...
Anybody knows?

Regards,
Evgenij
--

__________________________________________________
*science&fiction*free programs*fine art*phylosophy:
http://sudy_zhenja.tripod.com
----------remove hate_spam to answer--------------

On Tue, 03 Feb 2004 12:59:18 -0600, Evgenij Barsukov
<e-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>"Peterson, David" wrote:
>>
>> Looks like it was caused by a software bug... Spirit should be fully
>> fixed by next week. It's already sending pictures again
>
>I wonder what kind of hardware is Spirit using for its CPU?
>Has to be very low-power considering limiting power resources...
> Anybody knows?

Rad-hardened PowerPC chip. Probably a fairly old model by today's
standards, as NASA mostly uses tried-and-tested designs. Apparently
the same computer has been used with very few changes for a number of
other space missions. The system runs under the Wind River VxWorks
operating system (a popular and widely used RTOS).

You can find a bit more info here:

http://www.space.com/businesstechnol...er_040128.html


-------------
Tony Hill
hilla <underscore> 20 <at> yahoo <dot> ca

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>, e-barsoukov2
_(E-Mail Removed) says...
> "Peterson, David" wrote:
> >
> > > Yeah, the sorry USA space junk known as Spirit broke down - attributed
> > > to the flash memory. NASA should have sprung those extra bucks and
> > > gotten Kingston memory instead of that sorry ass IBM proprietary ****.
> > >
> > > The Russians can have (another) laugh at our expense.
> > >
> > > Poppa Capp
> >
> > Looks like it was caused by a software bug... Spirit should be fully
> > fixed by next week. It's already sending pictures again
>
> I wonder what kind of hardware is Spirit using for its CPU?

IBM PPC.

> Has to be very low-power considering limiting power resources...
> Anybody knows?

Yes.

--
Keith

Oh, no! It is Mac. Definitely.
Roman

Keith R. Williams wrote:
>>I wonder what kind of hardware is Spirit using for its CPU?

> IBM PPC.