23 Nov
2005
23 Nov
'05
2:13 p.m.
I've just
come across my first OS9 system, and know
absolutely nothing
about OS9 other than that it's vaguely
UNIX-like. Before I
try hooking
the hard disk up and seeing if it actually works,
obvious
questions follow: 
23 Nov
23 Nov
7:32 p.m.
Warning : My knowledge of OS-9 is beased entirely on the 6809 (8 bit)
version, I've never used a 68K version. I suspect some of the things that
I think were 'misisng' on the 6809 version (like shell variables and
wildcards) are present in the stnadard shell of the 68K version. But
anyway...
To begin to understand it, consider it to be a CP/M
clone with
multi-user extensions. List the files in the system directory and most
Internally it's not a bit like CP/M
of them will be vaguely familiar utilities. I believe
"DIR" was the
command. If not, use commands from other common OS's as it was the same
as one of them (LIST maybe?).
A few things....
At least in the 6809 version there was no equivalent to the PATH for
lookin for commands. At any time, a user had 2 default directories. One
was the data directory, the other the execution directory. The latter is
what was searched for commands.
File paths were somewhat unix-like. But you don't mount all the disks
into one filesystem. Rather, the first part of each complete file path is
the device name. I remeember floppies called /D0, /D1. etc and hard
drives /H0, /H1, etc. Some machines have a device /DD which is a copy of
the device descriptor for the drive you want to be the default.
So, for example, a file on the second floppy drive might be specified
soemthing like : /D1/pascal/demo.pas
Two of the built-in commands of the stnadard shell were CHD (to set the
data directory) and CHX (to set the execution directory). Typically the
latter is set to /D)/CMDS (that being the normal equivalent of /bin on a
unix box). Note that if you chanve floppies, you have to type CHX /D0/CMDS
(even if the directory was /D)/CMDS both before and after the change),
since IIRC, it stores a pointer to some part of that directory in RAM,
not the name iteslf.
IIRC, the stnadard name for the directory command was DIR, but of course
as it was simply a program loaded and run from the execution directory,
it could be called anything.
-tony
24 Nov
24 Nov
11:56 a.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
Warning : My knowledge of OS-9 is beased entirely on
the 6809 (8 bit)
version, I've never used a 68K version. I suspect some of the things that
I think were 'misisng' on the 6809 version (like shell variables and
wildcards) are present in the stnadard shell of the 68K version. But
anyway...
More UNIX-like than anything. In fact, some text implies that library calls
were kept as close to UNIX as possible to aid porting between the two.
Privately someone sent me a link to some very handy OS-9 manuals online after
reading these posts. I won't quote it here as presumably it was sent privately
for a reason, but I'm sure they'll pass it on to anyone else interested...
To begin to understand it, consider it to be a
CP/M clone with
multi-user extensions. List the files in the system directory and most
Internally it's not a bit like CP/M At least in the 6809 version there was no equivalent
to the PATH for
lookin for commands. At any time, a user had 2 default directories. One
was the data directory, the other the execution directory. The latter is
what was searched for commands.
That seems to be exactly the same with the 68k version. It seems a bit strange
given that the system's supposed to be multi-user and so binaries might be all
over the place. Presumably it was a memory-saving thing, but I would have
thought string-splitting routines needed to be in memory for other tasks
already, and all it needs on top of that is a loop-type construct to iterate
through each component of a path...
File paths were somewhat unix-like. But you don't
mount all the disks
into one filesystem. Rather, the first part of each complete file path is
the device name. I remeember floppies called /D0, /D1. etc and hard
drives /H0, /H1, etc. Some machines have a device /DD which is a copy of
the device descriptor for the drive you want to be the default.
Ahh, that's what /DD is :)
When this system boots from floppy it mentions "don't forget to set execution
path to /DD/blah/blah/..." or somesuch (user-added to the startup file). I
knew about /Dx and /Hx, but this was the first time I'd seen /DD anywhere.
IIRC, the stnadard name for the directory command was
DIR, but of course
as it was simply a program loaded and run from the execution directory,
it could be called anything.
Unbelievably, I've found Cumana's advertising flyer about the board - I got
hold of that sometime last year in a totally separate pile of stuff. They seem
to keep very quiet about the fact that it's a 68008 CPU rather than a 68000 :)
It does, however, list all the supported commands inside.
Oh, and even stranger than Cumana (the disk drive people) making a BBC
coprocessor that ran OS-9, is that Cumana also made a version for the Sinclair
QL (which I don't fully understand as the QL's already a 68008, right? Maybe
that version was just the extra RAM, floppy and SASI interface...)
According to the flyer, both Acorn and QL versions should come with a word
processor, spreadsheet, database, BASIC compiler, C compiler, Pascal compiler,
assembler, and graphics kernel.
I can only assume they're on the hard drive (which I can't access at present)
- but having said that, the flyer talks as though a hard disk was totally
optional. Wish I had all the install floppies!
cheers
Jules
1:12 p.m.
On Thu, November 24, 2005 11:56 am, Jules Richardson said:
Oh, and even stranger than Cumana (the disk drive people) making a BBC
coprocessor that ran OS-9, is that Cumana also made a version for the
Sinclair QL (which I don't fully understand as the QL's already a 68008,
right? Maybe that version was just the extra RAM, floppy and SASI
interface...)
It is, yes, or at least I *think* there's a SASI connector on there. I can
check when I get home, assuming my interface is down here with me and not
250 miles away :) I guess that if they made the interface for the Beeb
first it was probably very trivial to make one for the QL since they have
the same CPU?
cheers
--
adrian/witchy
Binary Dinosaurs creator/curator
www.binarydinosaurs.co.uk - the UKs biggest home computer collection?
1:34 p.m.
Witchy wrote:
On Thu, November 24, 2005 11:56 am, Jules Richardson
said:
I was wondering which was first. OTOH, the QL already has the right CPU so it
might make a more sensible development platform / proof of concept rather than
going to make a full BBC copro before you can do anything. Once you've bodged
some extra RAM, FDC etc. onto a QL you may as well just market the QL board too.
Plus of course doing it that way around would explain Cumana branching out
into the QL world; far as I know they never really strayed beyond BBC-related
stuff (drives, touch pad etc.) otherwise, so it seems a little strange them
selling QL hardware.
cheers
Jules
Oh, and even stranger than Cumana (the disk drive
people) making a BBC
coprocessor that ran OS-9, is that Cumana also made a version for the
Sinclair QL (which I don't fully understand as the QL's already a 68008,
right? Maybe that version was just the extra RAM, floppy and SASI
interface...)
It is, yes, or at least I *think* there's a SASI connector on there. I can
check when I get home, assuming my interface is down here with me and not
250 miles away :) I guess that if they made the interface for the Beeb
first it was probably very trivial to make one for the QL since they have
the same CPU?
9:06 p.m.
Plus of course doing it that way around would explain
Cumana branching out
into the QL world; far as I know they never really strayed beyond BBC-related
stuff (drives, touch pad etc.) otherwise, so it seems a little strange them
selling QL hardware.
On my right is a Cumana hard disk unit. It contains a Shugart ST612 drive
(maybe not original!), a WD1001 card, a PSU and a little interface board.
What makes it unusual is that it's not for the Beeb, or for any UK home
computer, it's for the TRS-80 Model 3 or Model 4 (and yes, it's totally
compatible with the Radio Shack one, not suprisingly).
-tony
8:59 p.m.
Tony Duell wrote:
The calls are very unix-like, but the internals of the OS are very
different. It's much more modular for one thing (device drivers and
descriptors are sepeare modules which can be loaded from the command
line, for example).
Warning : My knowledge of OS-9 is beased entirely
on the 6809 (8 bit)
version, I've never used a 68K version. I suspect some of the things that
I think were 'misisng' on the 6809 version (like shell variables and
wildcards) are present in the stnadard shell of the 68K version. But
anyway...
More UNIX-like than anything. In fact, some text implies that library calls
were kept as close to UNIX as possible to aid porting between the two. To begin to understand it, consider it to be a
CP/M clone with
multi-user extensions. List the files in the system directory and most
Internally it's not a bit like CP/M According to the flyer, both Acorn and QL versions
should come with a word
processor, spreadsheet, database, BASIC compiler, C compiler, Pascal compiler,
assembler, and graphics kernel.
Having used the 6809 version, the C should be pretty much original K&R,
the Pascal will be ISO level 0 with some extras (it doesn't quite make
level 1), and the BASIC should be BASIC-09, which IMHO is the best BASIC
ever (nicer, even, than BBC BASIC).
I can only assume they're on the hard drive (which
I can't access at present)
- but having said that, the flyer talks as though a hard disk was totally
optional. Wish I had all the install floppies!
It was certainly possible to run the 8-bit versions from floppies. Two
drives helped a lot, but it was just about possible on a single-drive
machine by swapping disks.
-tony
6975
days inactive
6976
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
ard＠p850ug1.demon.co.uk -
James＠jdfogg.com -
julesrichardsonuk＠yahoo.co.uk -
witchy＠binarydinosaurs.co.uk