andy@sdcarl.UUCP (Andrew Voelkel) (10/04/85)
I have been having trouble locating a cross compiler to generate
standalone (ROMable) 68k code that runs on the ibm pc. We are doing work
that requires such a compiler and I do not have access currently to a 68k
machine. I have only the board that the code is targeted for. We have had
trouble with the unix loader on the SUNs we have used in the past that was
solved by modifying the loader, so code for a standalone board isn't always
thought of even in the native compiler world. However; this is a moot point,
I need to generate code at a location which has no SUNs, I have only an
ibm pc.
Can anyone help me? I really do not want to have to decide amongst
the contenders for the 68k personal computer market right now. Nor do I
know if I think there won't be any problems even with most native mode
compilers that run on any of these (MAC, ATARI ST, AMIGA) when used to
write standalone code. Alternatively, I could use feedback from anyone who
has used any of these machines for such a purpose and their compiler-loader
experiences. Please respond by mail and thanks in advance
--
Andrew Voelkel
{ucbvax,ihnp4,akgua,hplabs,sdcsvax}!sdcarl!andyjimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) (10/17/85)
In article <244@sdcarl.UUCP> andy@sdcarl.UUCP (Andrew Voelkel) writes: > > I have been having trouble locating a cross compiler to generate >standalone (ROMable) 68k code that runs on the ibm pc. We are doing work >that requires such a compiler and I do not have access currently to a 68k >machine. I have only the board that the code is targeted for. We have had >trouble with the unix loader on the SUNs we have used in the past that was >solved by modifying the loader, so code for a standalone board isn't always >thought of even in the native compiler world. However; this is a moot point, >I need to generate code at a location which has no SUNs, I have only an >ibm pc. > Can anyone help me? I really do not want to have to decide amongst >the contenders for the 68k personal computer market right now. Nor do I >know if I think there won't be any problems even with most native mode >compilers that run on any of these (MAC, ATARI ST, AMIGA) when used to >write standalone code. Alternatively, I could use feedback from anyone who >has used any of these machines for such a purpose and their compiler-loader >experiences. Please respond by mail and thanks in advance > > >-- > Andrew Voelkel > {ucbvax,ihnp4,akgua,hplabs,sdcsvax}!sdcarl!andy Why not buy a proper 68000 software system? The Helix/Frank Hogg QT (4 terminal port) 68008 comes with all the software you need for development or business for about $3000.00 (US) depending on configuration ($2700.00 includes 512K, 10 meg. hard and 80 track floppy, $300.00 more for 20 meg. hard). It comes with BASIC09 and a relocatable macro assembler and linker, a real word processing system (Stylograph), a good spreadsheet (Dynacalc) and, of course, the rest of OS-9. Cheers! -- Jim O. -- James Omura, Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura Byte Information eXchange: jimomura Compuserve: 72205,541 MTS at WU: GKL6
andy@sdcarl.UUCP (Andrew Voelkel) (10/25/85)
>> I have been having trouble locating a cross compiler to generate >>standalone (ROMable) 68k code that runs on the ibm pc. We are doing work >>that requires such a compiler and I do not have access currently to a 68k >>machine. I have only the board that the code is targeted for. We have had >>trouble with the unix loader on the SUNs we have used in the past that was >>solved by modifying the loader, so code for a standalone board isn't always >>thought of even in the native compiler world. However; this is a moot point, >>I need to generate code at a location which has no SUNs, I have only an >>ibm pc. >QT (4 terminal port) 68008 comes with all the software you need for >development or business for about $3000.00 (US) depending on configuration >($2700.00 includes 512K, 10 meg. hard and 80 track floppy, $300.00 >more for 20 meg. hard). It comes with BASIC09 and a relocatable macro >assembler and linker, a real word processing system (Stylograph), a >good spreadsheet (Dynacalc) and, of course, the rest of OS-9. > > Cheers! -- Jim O. Os-9 definitely interests me, but I'd NEVER write any real time code in basic. Again the C cros compiler is the issue. I'm reluctant to spend $3000 on a system when my 20 meg 8mhz pc is perfectly adequate for i/o purposes. I would consider buying a $1000 68k coprocessor board for my pc provided I could get a cheap compiler to run on it which could produce romable code. I will be building 68k based boards and this is to develop software for them. A word about 0s9. While I find it intriguing, I am afraid of writing real time stuff (music stuff) for an OS for which I cannot obtain source code. Has anyone had experience writing real time stuff (resolution of 1ms) under OS9 who could say anything about it? -- Andrew Voelkel {ucbvax,ihnp4,akgua,hplabs,sdcsvax}!sdcarl!andy