Documentation revamp submission

Post Reply
User avatar
gen_angry
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat 25 Feb, 2017 6:48 am

Documentation revamp submission

Post by gen_angry »

Been a few months, haven't touched much on this at all since I finished (have had a lot happen lately).

I'm actually going to submit what I've got now since it is complete up to the v16 release so there's something up there. Anything new later on, I can add as 'patch' files later on I guess (or if someone is bored enough to add onto it).

Just drop both files from zip right in the 'root' folder.
Attachments
docs-pcem.zip
(12.93 KiB) Downloaded 445 times
User avatar
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by SarahWalker »

Sorry, been meaning to reply to this for a while now! In general I think this looks okay. I'm not familiar with this kind of markup though, can it be processed to a plain text file for the binary release?
shermanp
Posts: 175
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by shermanp »

SarahWalker wrote: Wed 25 Nov, 2020 8:09 am Sorry, been meaning to reply to this for a while now! In general I think this looks okay. I'm not familiar with this kind of markup though, can it be processed to a plain text file for the binary release?
The 'markup' is markdown, a simple text format that is actually quite readable as plain text.

The reason for doing it like this is that GitHub will automatically display the contents of a README.md below the code browser in a nice format (it's basically converted to an HTML representation for presentation). I think it also does the same for a plain text README file, but that doesn't have any formatting.

Here's a brief guide to GitHub's markdown flavor: https://guides.github.com/features/mastering-markdown/

EDIT: And if you wanted to, you could convert it to an HTML format for the binary release.
User avatar
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by SarahWalker »

If it can be converted to HTML then that's fine. Just want something that's readable out of the box for the end user who doesn't know what GitHub is and doesn't want to know.
shermanp
Posts: 175
Joined: Sat 18 Feb, 2017 2:09 am

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by shermanp »

There's probably plenty of online converters out there, but I'd suggest taking a look at Pandoc (https://pandoc.org/index.html), which can convert markdown to just about any other format under the sun.
User avatar
gen_angry
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat 25 Feb, 2017 6:48 am

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by gen_angry »

SarahWalker wrote: Wed 25 Nov, 2020 8:09 am Sorry, been meaning to reply to this for a while now! In general I think this looks okay. I'm not familiar with this kind of markup though, can it be processed to a plain text file for the binary release?
Sure I can hit that up at some point, maybe use a converter to be quick (if it works out that is). This submission is just for the repo.

Will try to go over the commit history too and tack on v17 stuff if I can unless you've got a rundown stored somewhere?
shermanp wrote: Wed 25 Nov, 2020 8:26 pm There's probably plenty of online converters out there, but I'd suggest taking a look at Pandoc (https://pandoc.org/index.html), which can convert markdown to just about any other format under the sun.
I'll give this a crack, looks interesting.
User avatar
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by SarahWalker »

Committed at 2ad5b83. I'm leaving this thread where it is in an attempt to remind me that we need to update for v17 and convert to HTML or similar before the release.
User avatar
gen_angry
Posts: 127
Joined: Sat 25 Feb, 2017 6:48 am

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by gen_angry »

SarahWalker wrote: Thu 26 Nov, 2020 8:43 am Committed at 2ad5b83. I'm leaving this thread where it is in an attempt to remind me that we need to update for v17 and convert to HTML or similar before the release.
You're missing "TESTED.md" from the zip - it's the 'software tested' list. If you wanted to scrap that, I can kill the part of the main documentation that links to it.
User avatar
SarahWalker
Site Admin
Posts: 2054
Joined: Thu 24 Apr, 2014 4:18 pm

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by SarahWalker »

My bad. Added at e8e0cf4.
r00lz
Posts: 3
Joined: Sun 20 Dec, 2015 3:39 pm

Re: Documentation revamp submission

Post by r00lz »

IBM PS/2 Model 70 (type 4)
ibmps2_m70_type3/70-a_even.bin
ibmps2_m70_type3/70-a_odd.bin

should be
ibmps2_m70_type4/70-b_even.bin
ibmps2_m70_type4/70-b_odd.bin
----------
Intel Premiere/PCI (Batman's Revenge)
revenge/1009af2_.bi0
revenge/1009af2_.bi1

should be
revenge/1009af2_.bio
revenge/1009af2_.bi1
-----------
Intel Advanced/EV (Endeavor)
endeavor/1006cb0_.bi0
endeavor/1006cb0_.bi1

should be
endeavor/1006cb0_.bio
endeavor/1006cb0_.bi1
------------
[286] IBM PS/1 model 2011 ROM location should be ibmps1es\f80000.bin
------------
Trident TGUI9400CXi ROM location should be 9400CXI.vbi
------------
Undocumented
Machines:
[286] Trigem 286M
[386SX] AMA-932J
Post Reply