On Fri, Jun 5, 2009 at 3:58 PM, Kirn Gill
<segin2005 at gmail.com>
wrote:
Well, out of curiosity, I'm going to attempt
to build gzip and
wget on it. I hope it doesn't crash.
It probably won't crash, but the compiler might or might not be
able to wedge all that code into the available code space.
Checking on a handy 64-bit Linux system, the gzip binary is under
64K total size, so that might not go so poorly. OTOH, wget is
nearly 256K. That will be "fun" to adapt. I recommend paring back
unneeded features and learning how overlays work.
I can just about guarantee that you'll have Makefile issues for
projects large enough or new enough to use configure scripts. Back
in the day, we crufted Makefiles by hand and edited source from
other variants of UNIX to make them work in our own environments.
That's why we have configure scripts now - you don't have to know
as many fiddly details and you can gather, configure and compile
projects with an absolute minimum of human input.
I've never used anything from this era
before, in terms of
"capable" computers. Apple ]['s don't count.
I started with BASIC and Assembler on the 6502, and the Apple II
counts (to me) because I earned my living off of it for nearly a
year. After that place closed (due to external factors like our
publisher, Reader's Digest, changing direction radically), I
learned C on an 11/750 (VMS 3.x and 4.0BSD, when they were new).
Wow, what a difference.
I think you should give it a shot, but when you run into problems
and issues, just remember that back in that era, we all ran into
the same sorts of roadblocks and issues all the time, especially
16-bit-pointer issues with the PDP-11. Some of that wisdom is
still available to search through in Usenet archives, but ISTR the
rise of Usenet and the rise of 32-bit computing are somewhat
intertwined. 16-bit computing was still around, of course, but in
the DEC world, it was vastly tilted towards RSX and RSTS and RT-11,
not so much with Unix by the mid 1980s. You might also get some
good advice looking into Minix issues - the 286 isn't close to
identical to the PDP-11, but 16 bits is 16 bits. Even reading up
on code development on MS-DOS will be illuminating (before the
advent of "32-bit extenders").
Linux started on a 386, bypassing these sorts of growing pains, so
experience gained there is mostly only helpful for user-level
familiarity, not working through small memory model compiling
issues.
-ethan
-ethan
I've messed with Minix on a 286; I used to keep a copy of i86 Minix
with the DOSMINIX laucher on a flash drive because it would run on
NTVDM (Windows NT's DOS VM). I've also messed with DOS programming.
It's a pain and a half and I avoided it like the plague; DOS is dead
and not of any intristic value unless you enjoy playing corny-looking
games or running horrid multitasking GUIs made by Microsoft. I know
enough C to make compilers shut up when porting code; I have tried
writing software on my own and I can show you some failed attempts I
just left behind (also due to lack of motivation, I get tired of doing
all the work myself)
If the /pointers/ on a PDP-11 are 16-bit as well, then I know what I
am up against. I've done a bit of coding with ELKS and
(aforementioned) Minix for pre-386 chips.
I wouldn't write any software on the machine, there's nothing useful I
can think of writing that I would actually deal with using. The fact
that the local 'vi' doesn't respond to ANSI/VT100 directional keys,
and only responds to h, j, k, l instead is enough to make me hate it.
And no, that's not going to motivate me to write a better editor. I
don't know how. If I did, I would have already done it and the holy
Emacs vs. Vi war would have been over, both sides having both lost.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla -
http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iEYEARECAAYFAkoqsSAACgkQF9H43UytGiZybACfSnYD40kWotXU0Wgpo1VoS6Tc
ewUAn3C4TJ7qZk5DV7FQ53y1DcV3ErkY
=2M26
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----