| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Vesa Johansson
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 7:30 am Post subject: Riisikourallisen hinta.. |
 |
|
*(Ydinklingonimme on parhaillaan niin kiivaskiukkusen käärmessmörkkisiä,
ettei juuri vastattavaa löydy)). Toki syynä se, että on tullut autonkuormina
ydinvastalunta tupasiinsa oikeen ÄIJÄKAADOLLA! Ja hyvä niin, jahka saamme
myös SDP:lle viimen ikävöidyn ydinvastaisemman johdon niin ..! Noo toki
katellaan miten homma pelittää, mutta Lipposen ote puolueestaan lentää kuin
sirrilintu Katmanduun.. .)
*Vaan hei iloa irti tästä?
*Yleisön pyynnöstä alan julkaisemaan Suomen ydinaavikoitumisen
nykytilastamme kertovaa faktaa.
M.T.28.05-08. Ilmatieteen laitos.
PAIKKA SADE mm.
_________________
Helsinki
Kiikkala
Turku 3,5mm
Jormala
Pori
Niinisalo
Tampere
Jokioinen 0,2
Lahti
Utti
L.ranta 0,7
Mikkeli
Ilomantsi 1,9
Joensuu 1,3
Kuopio 1,1
Viitasaari 2,7
Jyväskylä 0,3
Ähtäri 2,0
Kauhava 0,3
Vaasa 0,5
Ylivieska 1,0
Kajaani 0,2
Ruukki 0,5
Pudasjärvi
Suomussalmi 0,4
Kuusamo 1,5
Rovaniemi 4,4
Pello 1,3
Salla
Sodankylä 1,5
Muonio
Kilpisjärvi 1,1
Ivalo
Utsjoki
*KESKIARVO= 34kpl/ 0,78mm
Keskisadantavrk. 2mm/5vrk/10mm= 7,8%
JÄI -92,2% satamatta
_________________
*Niin? Kuka oikeasti edes yllättyi, että jälleen kerran lirvahti
kevätkuukausi tuskin muutaman prosentin normisadannalla? Toki
ilmatieteenlaitos vedättää kuun lopulla pokkana, että maailma suorastaan
hukkuu vesiin. No se meitä tietysti vain valheen määrässä enää jaksaa
huvituttaa. Oikeesti siis kuka tuollaista paskaa edes viittii lukea enää,
kun jokainen ymmärtää, että ollaan ydinaavikoitumisessa kamelikyydissä jo
kohti -50% normisadannan huonompaa päätä.
*Toki on päivän selvää, ettei tilanne parane kuin ajamalla ydinmörskät
rakettikuormana aurinkoon paskaksi. Meillä meni tässä nyt mehiläiset,
matelijat, sammakot, ehkä jo ensi viikolle taas odotamme mm. ydinlauhteisiin
kuolevan meremme syytämää kaspiankampamaneetti-invaasioita. Puumme menee
näköjään paperienergiatarpeineen ankeroisille muutamassa vuodessa! No yhtä
kaikki KUKAAN ei tule sanomaan, ettenkö jo pitkään ja hartaasti varoitellut
tulevien "punasadeaikojen kauhuista". Nukkukaa hyvin kiivaat
ydinklingonimme, pian emme enää uskalla ydinaavikoitumisen edetessä kohti
vääjäämätöntä loppukliimaksiaan.( |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Wim Lewis
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 7:43 am Post subject: Re: gsm modems? |
|
|
In article <3C62ADCB.CAC3436B@tin.it>, piero zanotto <pizanotto@tin.it> wrote:
| Quote: | is there anyone who knows if and where are available all detailed specs
on order to be able to use standard cell phones as gsm modem? I use
telital modules in embeddeded applications but I know for sure eicsson's
phones are feasible for the same purpose. piero
|
I think you need the GSM / ETSI 07.07 and 07.05 specifications --- these
describe the AT command set that many GSM devices implement. (Phones
usually have some proprietary extensions as well, check for docs from
Ericsson, I guess.) They're available publically on the net somewhere
or other.
I don't think there's much of a standard for how you get a serial
connection to the phone in the first place so that you can issue those
commands, though. Newer ones might use a USB modem class or Bluetooth
serial port profile, older ones probably have ttl-level async serial on
some wacky connector, or an IrDA port.
--
Wim Lewis <wiml@hhhh.org>, Seattle, WA, USA. PGP keyID 27F772C1
"We learn from history that we do not learn from history." -Hegel |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
woodz
Guest
|
| Posted: Wed Nov 26, 2008 7:22 am Post subject: Re: ST Microelectronics STM8 Programmer? |
|
|
Hello David,
have you already found a solution? We have exactly the same problem. We
need a batchable firmware programming solution which provide error handling
and pass/fail handling. The STM8 must be in circuit programmed over SWIM,
stand alone programming is not possible. We typically program the boards as
part of the in circuit test.
Thanks a lot
WOODZ
| Quote: | Havent used this with the STM8 myself yet, but I have always found this
to
be a decent tool:
http://www.raisonance.com/products/RLink.php
I work on ST support for a disty, so will have a look over the next
week...
Martin.
"David T. Ashley" <dta@e3ft.com> wrote in message
news:U-mdnQqFHb4xJtvVnZ2dnUVZ_h_inZ2d@giganews.com...
We are contemplating using the STM8 for a high-volume automotive
application.
We haven't been able to find a good end-of-line programming solution.
We
typically program our microcontrollers after the circuit boards are
fully
assembled.
For the Freescale parts, we've been using, we had good luck with P&E
Micro's Cyclone Pro:
http://www.pemicro.com/products/product_viewDetails.cfm?product_id=1&CFID=305902&CFTOKEN=65226101
But we haven't found a good SWIM programmer for the STM8.
I welcome all ideas.
Thanks a lot.
--
David T. Ashley (dta@e3ft.com)
http://www.e3ft.com (Consulting Home Page)
http://www.dtashley.com (Personal Home Page)
http://gpl.e3ft.com (GPL Publications and Projects)
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
CBFalconer
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 6:55 am Post subject: Re: ST Microelectronics STM8 Programmer? |
|
|
woodz wrote:
| Quote: |
have you already found a solution? We have exactly the same
problem. We need a batchable firmware programming solution which
provide error handling and pass/fail handling. The STM8 must be
in circuit programmed over SWIM, stand alone programming is not
possible. We typically program the boards as part of the in
circuit test.
|
Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:
<http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html>
<http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html>
<http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html>
<http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
<http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jujitsu Lizard
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 8:45 am Post subject: Re: ST Microelectronics STM8 Programmer? |
|
|
What is top-posting?
The Lizard
"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:492DEFE7.878C4C9F@yahoo.com...
| Quote: | woodz wrote:
have you already found a solution? We have exactly the same
problem. We need a batchable firmware programming solution which
provide error handling and pass/fail handling. The STM8 must be
in circuit programmed over SWIM, stand alone programming is not
possible. We typically program the boards as part of the in
circuit test.
Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net
Try the download section. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
CBFalconer
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 9:23 am Post subject: Re: ST Microelectronics STM8 Programmer? |
|
|
Jujitsu Lizard wrote: *** top-posting corrected ***
| Quote: | "CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
woodz wrote:
have you already found a solution? We have exactly the same
problem. We need a batchable firmware programming solution which
provide error handling and pass/fail handling. The STM8 must be
in circuit programmed over SWIM, stand alone programming is not
possible. We typically program the boards as part of the in
circuit test.
Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
What is top-posting?
|
On the minor possibility that you didn't read my post, do so now.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Jujitsu Lizard
Guest
|
| Posted: Thu Nov 27, 2008 9:23 am Post subject: Re: ST Microelectronics STM8 Programmer? |
|
|
Aren't top posts handled automatically?
On my original post ("What is top posting?"), I put it at the top.
On your reply, it is at the bottom.
This happens automatically, right?
So if it gets moved to the bottom automatically, why shouldn't I put my
comments at the top?
The Lizard
"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:492E1C9D.79235A17@yahoo.com...
| Quote: | Jujitsu Lizard wrote: *** top-posting corrected ***
"CBFalconer" <cbfalconer@yahoo.com> wrote in message
woodz wrote:
have you already found a solution? We have exactly the same
problem. We need a batchable firmware programming solution which
provide error handling and pass/fail handling. The STM8 must be
in circuit programmed over SWIM, stand alone programming is not
possible. We typically program the boards as part of the in
circuit test.
Please do not top-post. Your answer belongs after (or intermixed
with) the quoted material to which you reply, after snipping all
irrelevant material. See the following links:
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://www.caliburn.nl/topposting.html
http://www.netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
http://cfaj.freeshell.org/google/> (taming google)
http://members.fortunecity.com/nnqweb/> (newusers)
What is top-posting?
On the minor possibility that you didn't read my post, do so now.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net
Try the download section. |
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
CBFalconer
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Nov 29, 2008 4:11 am Post subject: Re: ST Microelectronics STM8 Programmer? |
|
|
Jujitsu Lizard wrote:
| Quote: |
Aren't top posts handled automatically?
On my original post ("What is top posting?"), I put it at the top.
On your reply, it is at the bottom. This happens automatically,
right? So if it gets moved to the bottom automatically, why
shouldn't I put my comments at the top?
|
No, they aren't moved automatically. This is your last chance to
avoid plonking, just in case you really believe such
misinformation. Just read the references I provided.
--
[mail]: Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
[page]: <http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
araffi
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Dec 01, 2008 10:12 pm Post subject: Re: Please recomend textbook with AES encryption. |
|
|
Hello,
to go a step further from here. In your sorce the algorithm as such as
desribed very well. And there are lots of existing 32bit algorihms, but it
is very hard to find a 16 bit-algorithm, that can be easily deployed and
used for the msp430.
I want to AES- encrypt messages of size < 32Byte with MSP430 with the IAR
workbench in c++. Does anyone know an easy to use C++ - library that works
with MSP430 for this purpose?
A similar question has been posted here (for C)
http://www.embeddedrelated.com/groups/msp430/show/21546.php
But with no satisfacting answer.
A version is sold from the crypto toolkit on
http://jce.iaik.tugraz.at/sic/products/crypto_software_for_microcontrollers/texas_instruments_msp430_microcontrollers.
Do you know of any free Rijndael implementation for a 16 bit system,
especially the msp430?
Thanks!
| Quote: | Not sure about textbooks, but the website...
http://csrc.nist.gov/CryptoToolkit/aes/rijndael/
Has detailed information.
|
|
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
John Larkin
Guest
|
| Posted: Sat Dec 06, 2008 7:25 am Post subject: Re: Release/Revision standard notation? |
|
|
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:57:02 -0500, "asdf" <sadf@sdff.com> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the format behind "Revision/Release" notation? For
example: Rev. 1.30.35; which is so common in software (and some hardware).
Is it an arbitrary system? I've tried searching for it, but come up empty
handed. I've been able to query on this:
IEEE standard taxonomy for software engineering standards
but, I keep coming up with sites that want me to pay for the article. Not to
mention the fact that the above article will have way more information that
I'm looking for. I can't think of what else to search on.
Any help?
Thanks,
Scott
|
The 4.00.02b notation is crap, and I can't see any patterns in actual
use.
As engineers, we use revision letters for code and for hardware. A
piece of embedded firmware is 28E346 rev A; the next release is B. All
the source files are named in the same pattern... assembly source is
28E346A.MAC and the associated FPGA config file might be 28C346A.RBT.
The shippable binary might be 28E346A.ROM.
A hardware top assembly could be 28A346-3B, where -3 is a version
(literally the "dash number") and B is the rev. This is basic
aerospace notation.
Before it defines a product, hardware and firmware documentation is
formally released to the company library, with a genuinely useful
README file, which library is where manufacturing always gets stuff
from. And it's all tested *before* it's released!
We also require that all software tools be identified, version
controlled, and released to the library too. So 10 years from now we
can run one batch file to regenerate the whole build, and know we'll
get exactly the same firmware, byte for byte.
John |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Joerg
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 6:46 am Post subject: Re: Release/Revision standard notation? |
|
|
John Larkin wrote:
| Quote: | On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:57:02 -0500, "asdf" <sadf@sdff.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the format behind "Revision/Release" notation? For
example: Rev. 1.30.35; which is so common in software (and some hardware).
Is it an arbitrary system? I've tried searching for it, but come up empty
handed. I've been able to query on this:
IEEE standard taxonomy for software engineering standards
but, I keep coming up with sites that want me to pay for the article. Not to
mention the fact that the above article will have way more information that
I'm looking for. I can't think of what else to search on.
Any help?
Thanks,
Scott
The 4.00.02b notation is crap, and I can't see any patterns in actual
use.
As engineers, we use revision letters for code and for hardware. A
piece of embedded firmware is 28E346 rev A; the next release is B. All
the source files are named in the same pattern... assembly source is
28E346A.MAC and the associated FPGA config file might be 28C346A.RBT.
The shippable binary might be 28E346A.ROM.
A hardware top assembly could be 28A346-3B, where -3 is a version
(literally the "dash number") and B is the rev. This is basic
aerospace notation.
|
Yep, same here.
| Quote: | Before it defines a product, hardware and firmware documentation is
formally released to the company library, with a genuinely useful
README file, which library is where manufacturing always gets stuff
from. And it's all tested *before* it's released!
We also require that all software tools be identified, version
controlled, and released to the library too. So 10 years from now we
can run one batch file to regenerate the whole build, and know we'll
get exactly the same firmware, byte for byte.
|
Then make sure you never use any dongled SW because that could seriously
throw a wrench in there.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Tim Wescott
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 8:30 am Post subject: Re: Release/Revision standard notation? |
|
|
On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:46:14 -0800, Joerg wrote:
| Quote: | John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:57:02 -0500, "asdf" <sadf@sdff.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the format behind "Revision/Release" notation? For
example: Rev. 1.30.35; which is so common in software (and some
hardware). Is it an arbitrary system? I've tried searching for it, but
come up empty handed. I've been able to query on this:
IEEE standard taxonomy for software engineering standards
but, I keep coming up with sites that want me to pay for the article.
Not to mention the fact that the above article will have way more
information that I'm looking for. I can't think of what else to search
on.
Any help?
Thanks,
Scott
The 4.00.02b notation is crap, and I can't see any patterns in actual
use.
As engineers, we use revision letters for code and for hardware. A
piece of embedded firmware is 28E346 rev A; the next release is B. All
the source files are named in the same pattern... assembly source is
28E346A.MAC and the associated FPGA config file might be 28C346A.RBT.
The shippable binary might be 28E346A.ROM.
A hardware top assembly could be 28A346-3B, where -3 is a version
(literally the "dash number") and B is the rev. This is basic aerospace
notation.
Yep, same here.
Before it defines a product, hardware and firmware documentation is
formally released to the company library, with a genuinely useful
README file, which library is where manufacturing always gets stuff
from. And it's all tested *before* it's released!
We also require that all software tools be identified, version
controlled, and released to the library too. So 10 years from now we
can run one batch file to regenerate the whole build, and know we'll
get exactly the same firmware, byte for byte.
Then make sure you never use any dongled SW because that could seriously
throw a wrench in there.
|
I try to be a nice guy, and one of the ways that I try to be a nice guy
is to be sensitive to those times when a vendor really doesn't want me to
be a customer. When a vendor starts throwing out subtle "we don't want
your business" clues, I do my best to find an alternate source, and allow
the grumpy vendor to go on with their business free of an risk of getting
my money.
Dongles are, IMHO, one way that a vendor screams "we don't want your
business, thank you".
--
Tim Wescott
Control systems and communications consulting
http://www.wescottdesign.com
Need to learn how to apply control theory in your embedded system?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" by Tim Wescott
Elsevier/Newnes, http://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
John Mianowski
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 5:45 pm Post subject: Re: Release/Revision standard notation? |
|
|
On Dec 7, 11:01 am, John Devereux <j...@devereux.me.uk> wrote:
| Quote: | John Larkin <jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes:
A hardware top assembly could be 28A346-3B, where -3 is a version
(literally the "dash number") and B is the rev. This is basic
aerospace notation.
How do you define the difference between a "version" and a "revision"?
|
I've seen a lot of different variations between industries, companies
within industries, etc. Sometimes you'll see it expressed as "VxRy"
or some variation that makes it a little easier to visualize.
Basically, there are 3 "levels" of change. The top level represents
basic, fundamental issues such as platform, core, basic features &
capabilities, etc. The next level might represent "secondary"
features, added to the primary ones at the top level. The 3rd level
would be changes based on problem corrections, that don't add any
particular feature or capability.
As an example, a company I used to work for used "V" numbers to define
the core processor & basic architecture generation of the system. V1
was the original, 8080-based system; V2 was 8086-based & fit the same
cabinets, but included some major changes to the inter-processor
communications & disk subsystems. V3 was a complete repackaging, with
upgrades to several subsystems but retention of the same CPU & inter-
processor comm. V4 was a consolidation & downsizing. V5 was another
complete repackaging with several upgrades to subsystems.
Within each Version 'x' were several revisions. Each revision level
introduced some new major features..Within each Revision 'y' were
potentially many lettered "Sub-revisions" that included bug fixes &
sometimes a new, minor feature. Sometimes, a R-level upgrade required
a corresponding hardware and/or firmware upgrade to go with it.
| Quote: | Are all version 3 products interchangeable, for example?
|
Maybe, maybe not. In the above example, V2R05A & V3R05A would
represent identical levels of feature enhancements & bug fixes, but
due to the base hardware platform differences between V2 & V3, neither
would run on the other platform. Also, V3R07A might not be backward-
compatible with V3R05C due to an hardware/firmware change(s) somewhere
in the system, to accommodate features in R7 that weren't in R5.
Generally, with a VxRy there was universal compatibility (i.e. you
could go back & forth between V3R8x & V3R8y with no problem other than
the possible reintroduction of bugs; sometimes a subrelease to "fix"
one bug created another, creating a need to accept the lesser bug
temporarily & revert to a prior level). Different "V" levels may also
have different "R" levels as well. Sometimes, a bug appears entirely
due to the change in "top" level so there's no corresponding need to
"fix" it in a prior level, since it doesn't exist there. Also, prior
"top" levels may become obsolete, with both feature enhancements and/
or bug fixes suspended.
The 'xxx.yyy.zzz' notation might represent similar levels, such as
'xxx' = base platform, core feature set, etc.; 'yyy' = feature
additions; 'zzz' = bug fixes. Then again, it might not.
As with so many things, "it depends".
JM |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Joerg
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 10:51 pm Post subject: Re: Release/Revision standard notation? |
|
|
Tim Wescott wrote:
| Quote: | On Sat, 06 Dec 2008 16:46:14 -0800, Joerg wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 5 Dec 2008 16:57:02 -0500, "asdf" <sadf@sdff.com> wrote:
Hi all,
Can anyone tell me the format behind "Revision/Release" notation? For
example: Rev. 1.30.35; which is so common in software (and some
hardware). Is it an arbitrary system? I've tried searching for it, but
come up empty handed. I've been able to query on this:
IEEE standard taxonomy for software engineering standards
but, I keep coming up with sites that want me to pay for the article.
Not to mention the fact that the above article will have way more
information that I'm looking for. I can't think of what else to search
on.
Any help?
Thanks,
Scott
The 4.00.02b notation is crap, and I can't see any patterns in actual
use.
As engineers, we use revision letters for code and for hardware. A
piece of embedded firmware is 28E346 rev A; the next release is B. All
the source files are named in the same pattern... assembly source is
28E346A.MAC and the associated FPGA config file might be 28C346A.RBT.
The shippable binary might be 28E346A.ROM.
A hardware top assembly could be 28A346-3B, where -3 is a version
(literally the "dash number") and B is the rev. This is basic aerospace
notation.
Yep, same here.
Before it defines a product, hardware and firmware documentation is
formally released to the company library, with a genuinely useful
README file, which library is where manufacturing always gets stuff
from. And it's all tested *before* it's released!
We also require that all software tools be identified, version
controlled, and released to the library too. So 10 years from now we
can run one batch file to regenerate the whole build, and know we'll
get exactly the same firmware, byte for byte.
Then make sure you never use any dongled SW because that could seriously
throw a wrench in there.
I try to be a nice guy, and one of the ways that I try to be a nice guy
is to be sensitive to those times when a vendor really doesn't want me to
be a customer. When a vendor starts throwing out subtle "we don't want
your business" clues, I do my best to find an alternate source, and allow
the grumpy vendor to go on with their business free of an risk of getting
my money.
Dongles are, IMHO, one way that a vendor screams "we don't want your
business, thank you".
|
Complete agreement in this here office :-)
I have never bought dongled SW in over 20 years. Not one.
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/
"gmail" domain blocked because of excessive spam.
Use another domain or send PM. |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
John Devereux
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Dec 07, 2008 11:01 pm Post subject: Re: Release/Revision standard notation? |
|
|
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> writes:
| Quote: | A hardware top assembly could be 28A346-3B, where -3 is a version
(literally the "dash number") and B is the rev. This is basic
aerospace notation.
|
How do you define the difference between a "version" and a "revision"?
Are all version 3 products interchangeable, for example?
--
John Devereux |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
