Every now and then a new user will send me a message indicating the code wouldn't boot and there are garbage characters on their Browser screen. This is almost always due to loading an "Upgradeable" code version when they should have loaded a "Non-Upgradeable" code version.
I think I can modify the code to output an "I2C EEPROM Missing" message when a user inadvertently tries to run an Upgradeable code revision. That may still result in an email to me, but it might save a few people the trouble. I won't be able to tell from code if the missing I2C EEPROM is due to a hardware fault or using the wrong code load ... I'll only be able to tell that the code needs the hardware, and it isn't there.
Every now and then a new user will send me a message indicating the code wouldn't boot and there are garbage characters on their Browser screen. This is almost always due to loading an "Upgradeable" code version when they should have loaded a "Non-Upgradeable" code version. I think I can modify the code to output an "I2C EEPROM Missing" message when a user inadvertently tries to run an Upgradeable code revision. That may still result in an email to me, but it might save a few people the trouble. I won't be able to tell from code if the missing I2C EEPROM is due to a hardware fault or using the wrong code load ... I'll only be able to tell that the code needs the hardware, and it isn't there.