FWU versus RFU Files

[KenB]

OK, this is gonna sound a bit weird, but please bear with me.

I have a custom System/Copy firmware that Ricoh wrote for us for the MP201.

It was only developed with remote installation in mind, so there is only an RFU version available, at least at present.

We have found that the remote install procedure doesn't work so hot in some locations (most likely due to slow connections and such), so we must install using the old fashioned SD card method.

My question is this: Is it possible to simply change the file extension from RFU to FWU, copy it to an SD card (in the correct "ROM data" folder, of course). and flash as normal ?

I don't have a machine to test with, and I can't afford to brick a customers production machine.

I called the help desk yesterday, and got "It's not supported, but we've never tried it", which was about what I expected.

Since the files are binary, I wasn't able to read anything usable with Notepad++.

Thanks!

[Eric1968]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

Never tried this, but I don't think just changing the extension will make it work. It network connections are slow, why not load the file using a laptop?

[KenB]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

Thanks, but unfortunately we have about 16 machines across the country that the remote version failed on, and they are stuck in "waiting for firmware" mode. They are at a point where the machine will ping, but the WIM never opens; that leaves the crossover approach out.

The only way to revive them is from an SD card install. The procedure laid out in Pub 81,which is supposed to be a fix for failed firmware updates, rarely works in this case.

[Tonerbomb]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

Never tried this, but I don't think just changing the extension will make it work. It network connections are slow, why not load the file using a laptop?

This bad, very bad. But I agree with Eric1968 that just changing the extension won't work. It maybe time to pack a bag for a long roadie !

[ruben]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

The file headers would be slightly different, but the contents should be the same. For example, comparing MP171 System firmware normal and remote before and after removing headers.

Looking over the firmwares for MPC2000 engine as well as MP171 and MP201, the headers for both (fwu) files looks like:

03 ff f8 25 0b c0 00 (13 times) 20 00 (3 times) then 40 47 57 46 55 ...

If you want to experiment, try deleting everything up to the first occurance (excluding) of the hex above; to look a bit like:

compare3.jpg

(I am assuming that headers are the same for your System firmware, best to check against a previous version of the normal firmware first.)

[slimslob]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

You will have to go to the machine to use a SD card. I would suggest that you first update and/or reflash all firmware without the custom firmware. This gets you back to a functional machine. You can then use a crossover cable to load the custom RFU file. The problem with trying to load RFU file from a remote location is you have no control over other access to the machine.

In the future, contact someone at the customer site. Have them pause printing and disconnect the FAX line. You then should use GoToMyPC to connect to a PC at the customer site and use WIM on that PC to do the firmware update.

[KenB]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

Thanks for the replies. I appreciate it!

We may just have to flash down to a tested, known good version, and wait for Ricoh to send us an SD version of the custom stuff. (The version have is only a beta, so it's still being developed.)

I just may experiment with your suggestion, Ruben, but only once I get my sticky little paws on a sacrificial MP201.

[Iowatech]

Re: FWU versus RFU Files

This probably isn't terribly helpful, but if time permits you might just for giggles want to run the custom firmware through this and see what happens:

Not sure now, but it used to be free.