@A.R.
Quote:

I began my programming endeavors on the Commodore 64. With a total of 64kB of RAM and a 1MHz 6502-compatible processor, I did not have the luxury to waste a single clock cycle.

Ah the wonders of zero-page. Always wishing I had just 6-8 more addresses.

Plaz

btw isnt the v5 supposed to be much more 68k compatible than the v4?

_________________

@Toaks

Quote:

only if youre color blind

Bah. It's machine language cycle counting.

#6

_________________
This posting, in its entirety, represents solely the perspective of the author.
*Secrecy has served us so well*

@g_kraszewski

Quote:

Linux was designed for cross-CPU portability.

Not quite accurate, the design of Linux has evolved over time. Torvalds started Linux as a x86 project, and then other people thought that it would be nice to have a GPL kernel like Linux for their favourite archs too. At the time, Hurd was to be the GPL OS of choice, but Linux was a much more pragmatic effort, it was easier to move forward with it. Also Linux was pretty much coded with the POSIX specs in mind, so it made sense to use it. To begin with non-x86 archs were pretty much seperate source trees, but over time, as the project matured, more and more could be merged into the same source tree. I remember the m68k effort struggling, when suddenly Jes Sørensen joined with his updated m68k kernel source tree, based on 1.2.13 (iirc)... ah, good times

_________________
B5D6A1D019D5D45BCC56F4782AC220D8B3E2A6CC

Quote:

Cod3r wrote: There would have to be some form of emulation unless they ran ColdFire binaries alone, because some of the opcodes overlap and would have unexpected results on opposite processors (68k or ColdFire).

I only see 1 incompatible encoding. REMU/REMS uses the same encoding as DIVUL/DIVSL but drops the quotient. The other common user instructions do not overlap. Take a look at this encoding map:

http://www.heywheel.com/matthey/Amiga/68kandCF_map.pdf

BITREV, BYTEREV, FF1, SATS, MVS, MVZ and MOV3Q do not overlap in any way with any 68k encoding. TPF is a 68k TRAPF which does the same thing with a different name. I have assembled code for the ColdFire with vasm which produces an Amiga hunk format containing the CF code and disassembled it with ADis to test the CF instructions I added. I use ADis -m6+ to allow 68060 instructions and CF instructions to disassemble. DIVUL/DIVSL are used instead of REMU/REMS because of the incompatibility and TRAPF is used instead of TPF. Almost all user level CF instructions can coexist with 68k in the same executable just fine. I don't know of an assembler that will allow 68k and CF instructions at the same time but they can be combined with DC.W by hand.

http://www.heywheel.com/matthey/Amiga/ADis.lha
http://sun.hasenbraten.de/vasm/

You won't find a better 68k and CF peephole optimizing assembler than vasm by the way. We worked hard on the optimizations in preparation for fpga cores getting CF instructions as well as for CF support. The author is Frank Wille, a great guy with Amiga roots. Vasm is the assembler for the vbcc compiler by the way.

Quote:

Yssing wrote: btw isnt the v5 supposed to be much more 68k compatible than the v4?

Shhh! CF v5 is top secret unless you are HP or can flash a few million. Even developers are on a need to know basis with CF v5 because it's so awesome. I don't know any developers that have been able to get documentation. It must have been getting too close in power to the PowerPC so Freescale had to pull out the anti-marketing campaign like they did with the 68060 :/.

@matthey

I've always used this as my reference:
http://www.microapl.co.uk/Porting/ColdFire/cf_68k_diffs.html

And it doesn't exactly seem to agree with you on the differences there.

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote: @Cod3r So while you're playing with your 400MHz device surfing optimized-for-mobile websites and downloading tens of gigabytes of mpeg1 and 2 because you can't play the heavier codecs, the rest of the world will wonder "what's the point?". Yes, we all agree an OS can be booted up on a limited device, but it's just not gonna cut it to access the content (be it media, games or productive applications) that other people use. Opened any huge pdf's lately? Like, say, the MPC5121e reference manual? Let's see a movie of you scrolling around in that on your coldfire

You just aren't getting it... 400mhz CAN do codecs, man. You just have not done your homework. Plenty of examples exist in the real world and in the not so distant past. Even Windows systems with 400mhz dog slow Celerons back on Windows Me did compressed video! You must be too busy living in your bubble to realize that.

I'm not saying it will be all that fast but it can do it. I would never think I would have to argue with an AMIGA user about how mhz isnt everything... you sure you aren't running Windows Vista over there???

@cgutjahr

Quote:

cgutjahr wrote: @Cod3r Quote: running an emulator? Hmm... that's the ideal solution? The "ideal" solution depends on one's needs and tastes, obviously. If I had to separate Amiga users into groups, I'd come up with the following: 1. People that love tinkering with old software, games or projects but don't care about hardware: For this group, UAE is indeed the ideal solution: it's the cheapest and most compatible alternative, it doesn't require additional hardware because it runs on pretty much everything and on modern hardware it's fracking fast. 2. People that love tinkering with old software/games/projects but want the real retro feel: They don't like emulators, they want real hardware - be that the real thing produced 20 years ago, or a clone implemented using modern technology. Because they want to play old games in their living room (no PC there), because emulators don't make them feel nostalgic enough, because they're geeks and like to own a myriad of different systems etc. 3. hardware fetishists: Whatever it is, as long as it's old and has an Amiga sticker on it, it's worth cleaning, repairing, upgrading, bragging about, spending hours finding a connection problem that makes the machine unstable etc. 4. people who want to use AmigaOS (or a clone) as a real, modern day desktop OS: they would want the fastest hardware possible, and of course a version of the OS that is still maintained. I didn't follow the whole thread, but from what I gather your offering doesn't appeal to any of these groups. No compatibility with Amiga hardware, not as fast and/or cheap as other offerings. another fork of an OS that has most drive on x86, no official branding... What would be the target audience for your solution? Quote: If that was the case, why in the heck did I waste 9 months making a CF board run Aros 68k? Because it was fun, I guess?

So you believe that my offering does not appeal to any of those groups, am I right? Then tell me why people from ALL of those groups PM me about merging my work with theirs in one form of another? Since when do you speak unaminmously for all Amiga users?

And yes it was great fun and a heck of sense of achievement but I am sure you don't see it as such.

But it must be because none of you critics have done it...

@Cod3r

I think that you missundestood cgutjahr

You project would atract groups 2, 3 and 4

Group 2. is main your target group. Problem with them is word emulator :) That why is important how you implemt 68k compatiability. For them best solution would be something like Oxypatcher http://www.nightvzn.net/portfolio/web/amiga_monitor/archives/2_9html/oxy.htm

Groups 3 and 4 has a limited interest, for group 3 problem is that it is not Commodore or Amiga for group 4 problem is where do you get "modern destop OS"? Aros has it change, but ... it doesn't have modern web browser etc.

I really thing that you should take a contact to Elbox and ask if they still have dragon hardware or interest to it. With them you wouldn't have problems that you have with your current hardware.

Best place to talk about your project would be amiga.org, there are much more classic hardware hobbyists, though they are cynical and probably unfriendly, but still

Last edited by utri007 on 24-Jul-2012 at 08:03 AM.
Last edited by utri007 on 24-Jul-2012 at 08:01 AM.
Last edited by utri007 on 24-Jul-2012 at 08:00 AM.

@g_kraszewski

Quote:

g_kraszewski wrote: @Cod3r You can run a modern web browser with 80MB. Mobile devices do it all day long without swapping. Name one and what engine it uses. My phone has 128 MB RAM and very often browsing ends with out of memory message. And you can watch a 720p movie (depending on its encoding) with 400mhz. H.264 or WebM, I usually encounter these two. Efika can play 360p with some trouble. If you can do 720p encoded with one of the above, on 400 MHz ColdFire without hardware acceleration, your decoder must be very well optimized I would say... but if you are a commercial OS on the fringe of what is considered modern you shouldn't need more requirements than freely available OSes (with open source) can offer. If you browse operating systems, which can be run on MorphOS hardware base, MorphOS is the fastest and has the lowest resource consumption. You can always join the team (after showing some portfolio I guess...) and show us how it should be done . You know, talk is cheap...

Dillo, Opera, man... there are tons. Google is your friend. They may not be popular but they work.

Have not done anything with the ColdFire for video applications... yet. But if and when I do I will silence all doubts.

And if you are talking about MorphOS is the fastest and lowest resource consumption, you don't read or get out much. There are entire categories of operating systems faster with lower resource consumption than MorphOS. There are pet projects that are thirty times more capable that MorphOS. Really, what are you smoking? It must be some good stuff and I would like some

Dude, just because you use MorphOS don't create fantasies about it

And to respond to the part about "showing portfolio" and joining the team... Have you realized that I am so far the only one who has got Aros to run on a ColdFire? Is that good enough??? Oh and I only work full time on projects that affect lives, safety and security-Mission critical stuff.

Now I wouldn't trust MorphOS to be stable in a mission critical application

The only modern PPC OS success story is Yellow Dog Linux, not MorphOS. YDL has made good money making PPC Linux code on cutting edge platforms that actually do something. And it is open source. MorphOS is running on 10 year old Macs.

@Yssing

Quote:

Yssing wrote: @g_kraszewski Well I installed Opera Mobile on my Sony Hazle, it even runs html5.

Thanks for pointing that out. Glad to know I am not the only one who understood the fact that some modern apps have respectable requirements.

@kolla

Quote:

kolla wrote: @g_kraszewski Quote: Linux was designed for cross-CPU portability. Not quite accurate, the design of Linux has evolved over time. Torvalds started Linux as a x86 project, and then other people thought that it would be nice to have a GPL kernel like Linux for their favourite archs too. At the time, Hurd was to be the GPL OS of choice, but Linux was a much more pragmatic effort, it was easier to move forward with it. Also Linux was pretty much coded with the POSIX specs in mind, so it made sense to use it. To begin with non-x86 archs were pretty much seperate source trees, but over time, as the project matured, more and more could be merged into the same source tree. I remember the m68k effort struggling, when suddenly Jes Sørensen joined with his updated m68k kernel source tree, based on 1.2.13 (iirc)... ah, good times

Thanks for pointing that out. I knew that as fact but didn't feel like arguing yet another point...

@olegil

Quote:

olegil wrote: @matthey I've always used this as my reference: http://www.microapl.co.uk/Porting/ColdFire/cf_68k_diffs.html And it doesn't exactly seem to agree with you on the differences there.

You have the right info. Matthey's reference is off.

@Yssing

Well I installed Opera Mobile on my Sony Hazle, it even runs html5.

According to specification, this phone has 280 MB of memory built in.

_________________
RastPort

@Cod3r

And if you are talking about MorphOS is the fastest and lowest resource consumption, you don't read or get out much.

"On hardware supported by MorphOS", you have preferred to slip over this part.

There are pet projects that are thirty times more capable that MorphOS.

Any example? And what method do you use to measure "capability" of an operating system, so you get the number 30?

Have you realized that I am so far the only one who has got Aros to run on a ColdFire?

So do you have plans to join MorphOS Team?

_________________
RastPort

This is a intresting thread for causual readers, but I almost feel its spiraling into a nitpicking
contest.

What I have a hard time getting a handle on, is where this is going.

What are the spesific goals, plans and hopes for example Cod3r.

Maybe Im too dense to see it.

@Cod3r

MorphOS hobbyist are annoying, they hijack every OS thread and start to advertaising their own OS. Sometimes it is like they are more interested other OSs than their own, because typical MorphOS thread has about 10-20 posts, but they doesn't have any problem to write hundreds posts to OS4/Aros etc threads.

Sorry that :) Your project is interesting

Last edited by utri007 on 24-Jul-2012 at 09:08 AM.

@Cod3r

You got AROS running on a ColdFire, congrats.

Are you willing to try to port AROS to Raspberry Pi (native)?

@utri007

Quote:

Aros has it change, but ... it doesn't have modern web browser etc.

Owb? BTW, by morphos developer. I have not seen it yet working on 68k though.

@Overflow, @utri007

Nitpicking is usually started when someone (Cod3r this time) starts to write bold statements about something he has no knowledge (MorphOS this time). And yes, in such case MorphOS hobbyists can be annoying, but I see no MorphOS advertising happening there.

Cod3r seems to be not interested in PowerPC (which is understandable) and I have a feeling he is a bit irritated by the fact "nextgen" systems abandoned M68k family (which is also understandable). I only can wish him luck with his project. As cgutjahr noted, audience of it may be somewhat limited. On the other hand, anyone can port AROS to anything he considers interesting. I have some curiosity to see how AROS performs on ColdFire and what can be squeezed from those processors. Yet I have no serious interest in the project. Therefore I apologize anyone feeling offended by "those annoying MorphOS hobbyists", just please, reconsider such unverifiable statements like the one about "30 times more capable systems" .

_________________
RastPort