13 Nov
2005
13 Nov
'05
5:48 p.m.
Subject: Re: semi-homemade micro
From: woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca>
Date: Sun, 13 Nov 2005 11:04:38 -0700
To: General Discussion: On-Topic and Off-Topic Posts <cctalk at
classiccmp.org>
compoobah at valleyimplants.com wrote:
Uhm, what about 12bit[OS8 srt-8]? There are few othter word lenths
than those that are not unobtainium.
All the talk about building a mini from TTL got me
thinking about homebuild micros, and what one would look like if I decided to build one
(been playing with my IMSAI, too, which probably accounts for some of it)
Woodelf mutters:
The biggest thing I can think of is you only have two sizes of
computer today ... 16 bits or 32 bits of addressing. You can only get the 16 machines easly and resonable
source of a OS.
Explain that from your perspective.
The 68000 yes still works best with 64k addressing.
Oddly the only micocomputer chip I like ( other than the 6800/6809) is
National Semiconductor's 16032 is another chip that you could never get.
T-11 regular instruction set of the PDP-11. Not too hard to find.
Z8001 and Z8002s I have a few of. Z280, theres an interesting varient
of Z80 with 24bit MMU that looks like the DEC PDP11 MMU (even I&D!).
So you have to be a bit more descriptive.
Allison
13 Nov
13 Nov
6:18 p.m.
Allison wrote:
My perspective is things that I have seen in my past other than DEC or
IBM or other BIG IRON.
That was mostly 8080's , Z80's and other items advertised in BYTE. CP/M
was the only one
that I know of that you could get source for to adapt to your
computer. Once the PC arrived
open source vanished. Sure linux is open source but who can read or
adpt the several meg
of source to a small machine. Minux was a nice try but it lacked a C
Compiler. Small C went
a DEAD end route as you could only use it if you bought the out of print
books.
Yes I know I keep forgeting the 11 but I got forced into using PC's so
only now do I
have the time and a tiny amount a money for classic computers.
Uhm, what about 12bit[OS8 srt-8]? There are few
othter word lenths
than those that are not unobtainium.
Well what about them?
You can only
get the 16 machines easly and resonable source of a OS.
Explain that from your perspective.
The 68000 yes
still works best with 64k addressing.
Oddly the only micocomputer chip I like ( other than the 6800/6809) is
National Semiconductor's 16032 is another chip that you could never get.
T-11 regular instruction set of the PDP-11. Not too hard to find.
Z8001 and Z8002s I have a few of. Z280, theres an interesting varient
of Z80 with 24bit MMU that looks like the DEC PDP11 MMU (even I&D!).
So you have to be a bit more descriptive.
Allison
7:29 p.m.
On November 13, 2005 6:18 pm, woodelf wrote:
Allison wrote:
that I know of that you could get source for to adapt to your
computer. Once the PC arrived
open source vanished. Sure linux is open source but who can read or
adpt the several meg
of source to a small machine.
Linux supported CPU's
Intel 386SX/DX/SL, 486SX/DX/SL/SX2/DX2/DX4, Pentium, Pentium Pro, Pentium II,
Pentium III (regular and Xeon versions), Pentium 4, and Celeron, i960, IA-64,
8086, 8088, 80286
AMD 386SX/DX, 486SX/DX/DX2/DX4, K5, K6, K6-2, K6-3, and Athlon
AMD's 64-bit Opteron and Athlon64 processors, as well as the mobile Athlon64
(or Turion64),
Cyrix 386SX/DX, 486SX/DX, 5x86, 6x86, and MediaGX are all supported.
IDT Winchip C6-PSME2006A
Transmeta Crusoe processor
MIPS 34K, 4K/4KE, ADMtek MIPS32 SoS, AMD Alchemy MIPS32 SoC family,
ATI XILLEON, Broadcom SB-1 family, Broadcom MIPS32 SoC family, Emulators
IDT RC32300 RISCore family, Lexra, MIPS 24K core family, NEC VR4100 family,
Philips Poseidon PR31x00 family, R10000, R12000, R14000, R2000, R3000,
R4000, R4400, R4600, R4700, R5000, R5900, R6000, R8000, RM5200 family,
RM7000 family, RM7900 family, RM9000 family, Texas Instrument AR7 family,
Toshiba TX39XX family, Toshiba TX49XX family
Motorola 68030, 68040, 68328, ColdFire 5206e, 5307, 5407, MC68EN302 and
MC68EN360, QUICC, Freescale i.MX21
PowerPC, PowerPC64
ARM, stongarm,
Hitachi SuperH, SH, H8S-2148 and H8S-2149, h8300, SH7044, SH7206, SH4-102,
SH4-103, SH4-201, SH4-202, SH5-101, SH5-103, ST40RA (formerly ST40STB1),
ST40GX1
SPARC, UltraSPARC
v850 processors
Axis ETRAX
Compaq Alpha AXP
IBM zSeries and S/390
HP PA-RISC
Dec Vax
CRIS
Emotion Engine (SONY Playstation 2) http://playstation2-linux.com/
TMS320 Digital Signal Processor (Texas Instrument) http://www.dsplinux.net/
ITRON
Atmel AT91: AT91M40400, AT91M40800, AT91R40807, AT91M40807, AT91M42800,
AT91M55800, AT91M63200, AT91M40400, AT91RM9200.
http://www.tldp.org/FAQ/Linux-FAQ/kernel.html#what-ports-to-other-processor…
http://www.uclinux.org/ports/
http://www.klinux.org/en/platforms.html
7:39 p.m.
Mike wrote:
On November 13, 2005 6:18 pm, woodelf wrote:
I said small machine --- is a small machine a 386?
Can you tell me how much memory GNU C uses to compile itself?
No wait that is listed a memory test!
Linux is nice , but I am looking at small systems right now!
Allison wrote:
that I know of that you could get source for to adapt to your
computer. Once the PC arrived
open source vanished. Sure linux is open source but who can read or
adpt the several meg
of source to a small machine.
Linux supported CPU's
Intel 386SX/DX/SL, 486SX/DX/SL/SX2/DX2/DX4, Pentium, Pentium Pro, Pentium II,
Pentium III (regular and Xeon versions), Pentium 4, and Celeron, i960, IA-64,
8086, 8088, 80286
9:48 p.m.
On 11/14/05, woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Well, depends on how small is small...
Is a Motorola Dragonball small (M68EZ328)? uclinux runs on that. Or
how about H8?
Check out http://www.uclinux.org for a MMU-less variant..
If your "small" must be 8-bit, then there's always uCos, and a bunch
of other RTOSes...
Linux supported
CPU's
Intel 386SX/DX/SL, 486SX/DX/SL/SX2/DX2/DX4, Pentium, Pentium Pro, Pentium II,
Pentium III (regular and Xeon versions), Pentium 4, and Celeron, i960, IA-64,
8086, 8088, 80286
I said small machine --- is a small machine a 386?
Can you tell me how much memory GNU C uses to compile itself?
No wait that is listed a memory test!
Linux is nice , but I am looking at small systems right now!
11:13 p.m.
Wai-Sun Chia wrote:
Well, depends on how small is small...
Is a Motorola Dragonball small (M68EZ328)? uclinux runs on that. Or
how about H8?
Check out http://www.uclinux.org for a MMU-less variant..
If your "small" must be 8-bit, then there's always uCos, and a bunch
of other RTOSes...
For myself a C style compiler would be nice, but I am developing
a 18 bit computer
here. Ok today I am mostly answering email on the list. Unix #1
would be great to
port but that is still AT&T code with all the software rights to it
since the basic PDP 11
only had 24Kb of memory. http://www.cs.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/hist.html
.
For current 8 bit wide machines you have a lot of software but most of
looks to be cross
development stuff. That is my complaint but I can understand it since
windows and macs and
unix came to take the majority of the software used.
7:40 p.m.
On Sun, 13 Nov 2005 16:18:41 -0700
woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Allison wrote:
My perspective is things that I have seen in my past other than DEC or
IBM or other BIG IRON.
That was mostly 8080's , Z80's and other items advertised in BYTE. CP/M
was the only one
that I know of that you could get source for to adapt to your
computer. Once the PC arrived
open source vanished. Sure linux is open source but who can read or
adpt the several meg
of source to a small machine. Minux was a nice try but it lacked a C
Compiler.
Minix has a C compiler. And you don't have to buy Andrew Tannenbaum's book to get
it anymore. And there are many, numerous other small and 'free' OSes out there.
uCOs, for example.
Open source didn't 'vanish' when the PC arrived. What happened was the field
exploded, and suddenly there were so many different directions to take with things that a
small tight community was no longer possible. With the dozens, hundreds of tools people
were using in the MS-DOS era to develop programs for the PC, it no longer was possible for
everybody to share the same codebase.
Uhm, what about 12bit[OS8 srt-8]? There are few
othter word lenths
than those that are not unobtainium.
Well what about them?
You can
only get the 16 machines easly and resonable source of a OS.
Explain that from your perspective.
14 Nov
14 Nov
5:23 a.m.
of source to a small machine. Minux was a nice try
but it lacked a C
Compiler. Small C went
Minix does not only include a C compiler, it now even includes the
sources of its C compiler. The compiler is called the ACK compiler,
short for Amsterdam Compiler Kit.
From version 3 onwards, drivers are supposed to run in userland. This
has to lead to an extremely reliable OS. There are lots of (other)
improvements made to version 3.
Bert
2:12 p.m.
Bert Thomas wrote:
Well I *had* the 1st book. No compiler source!! I have not looked at
it for a long time.
Any how my stack on this homebrew is strange. It builds up from
nnn0000 (octal) and
is only 4kb max. If you figure the ACK compiler can handle that I might
consider porting
it. Oh yah a stack frame is only about 48 words.
of source to a
small machine. Minux was a nice try but it lacked a C
Compiler. Small C went
Minix does not only include a C compiler, it now even includes the
sources of its C compiler. The compiler is called the ACK compiler,
short for Amsterdam Compiler Kit.
From version 3 onwards, drivers are supposed to run in
userland. This
has to lead to an extremely reliable OS. There are lots of (other)
improvements made to version 3.
I guess I may need to buy a new book! :)
Bert
.
6:38 p.m.
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 12:12:55 -0700
woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Bert Thomas wrote:
Well I *had* the 1st book. No compiler source!! I have not looked at
it for a long time.
Any how my stack on this homebrew is strange. It builds up from
nnn0000 (octal) and
is only 4kb max. If you figure the ACK compiler can handle that I might
consider porting
it. Oh yah a stack frame is only about 48 words.
It's not licence-bound to a book the way earlier versions were. You can download
Minix from their website at no cost at all.
http://minix1.hampshire.edu/
or
http://www.minix3.org/
of source
to a small machine. Minux was a nice try but it lacked a C
Compiler. Small C went
Minix does not only include a C compiler, it now even includes the
sources of its C compiler. The compiler is called the ACK compiler,
short for Amsterdam Compiler Kit.
From version 3 onwards, drivers are supposed to
run in userland. This
has to lead to an extremely reliable OS. There are lots of (other)
improvements made to version 3.
I guess I may need to buy a new book! :)
8:02 p.m.
Scott Stevens wrote:
It's not licence-bound to a book the way earlier
versions were. You can download Minix from their website at no cost at all.
http://minix1.hampshire.edu/
or
http://www.minix3.org/
But I like the book, note I lost my copy a few years ago. Hard copy is nice.
9:28 p.m.
On Mon, 14 Nov 2005 18:02:27 -0700
woodelf <bfranchuk at jetnet.ab.ca> wrote:
Scott Stevens wrote:
I agree. Tannenbaum's book is on my shelf.
But the old Prentice-Hall license requiring you to buy a copy of the book to use Minix is
gone.
It's not licence-bound to a book the way
earlier versions were. You can download Minix from their website at no cost at all.
http://minix1.hampshire.edu/
or
http://www.minix3.org/
But I like the book, note I lost my copy a few years ago. Hard copy is nice.
6825
days inactive
6827
days old
11 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
ajp166＠bellatlantic.net -
bert＠brothom.nl -
bfranchuk＠jetnet.ab.ca -
chenmel＠earthlink.net -
kenziem＠sympatico.ca -
waisun.chia＠gmail.com