easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) (03/25/89)
Here is a summary of the responses I got from my earlier posting about porting OS9 from the coco III to other machines. > from tim hogard Mailed March 20, 1989 at 11:26 pm > > To run os9/2 you will need hardware to map memory addresses from the 64K > limit to the larger memory address space. > Your problem will be to write a disk driver if you can get the os9 kernal > moved. I would start with a os9 level I and I would try to get the > terminal/screen drivers written first, (you can test them out when flex is > running) and then try to get the disk code to work. > The coco 3 has a unique memory management chip so you will have to rewrite > part of the level II kernal if you want level II. > -tim >> Dru Nelson Mailed March 13, 1989 at 9:03 pm >> >> I don't think so. You will sort of be better off by taking Level I >> and adding the Level II calls to it. The coco III has the memory >> management and the different video. If you can hardware hack a memory >> management unit, it shouldn't be hard to go the Level II route. The >> speed of your machine may also be a little, very little, important. >> Making a ROM for the DRC should be easy with os9's module format. >> Good luck fellow 6809'er. If you have any problems, questions, I will >> try to help. It's my favorite chip. ----------------------------^ Mine too! Okay, level 2 is out. I could use it later after I build that 2 Meg bank switching RAM disk I'm thinking about :> Has anyone actually ported the OS9 from coco's to other machines? Do I need to buy a coco III just to reassemble the drivers for my uniboard SBC? Is there enough technical descriptions of the drivers (source code hopefully) in the documentation that comes with the package? Is it a seperate item you have to buy? Here's my guess at a scenario for porting it. 1> Buy the OS9 level I & the assembler package 2> Rewrite the 6551 ACIA drivers for the deluxe RS232 pak for my 6551 at a different address. sounds easy 3> Rewrite the disk drivers for my WD 1793 disk controller what chip does the coco use? a WD 17xx I think 4> Write a boot strap loader for OS9 5> At this point I should be able to boot OS9 with a terminal connected to my serial port. I then can write the drivers for my video (MC6845 based) and keyboard (7 bit ASCII w/strobe). Does OS9 require a timer for switching processes? I have a 6522 VIA with 2 8 bit timers. Is this sufficent? -Jeff Easton Zenith Data Systems Disclaimer: All standard disclaimers apply.
jejones@mcrware.UUCP (James Jones) (03/25/89)
As a matter of fact, Sardis Technologies (the folks who did the first "no-halt" floppy controller for the CoCo) have advertised a 6809 SBC for which one could do just what you describe. James Jones
kim@mcrware.UUCP (Kim Kempf) (03/26/89)
In article <386@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes:
=Has anyone actually ported the OS9 from coco's to other machines? Do I
=need to buy a coco III just to reassemble the drivers for my uniboard SBC?
=Is there enough technical descriptions of the drivers (source code
=hopefully) in the documentation that comes with the package? Is it a
=seperate item you have to buy?
=
...also required a License Agreement with Microware. Technical information,
support and other help is provided for the license fee. Remember that OS-9
is not owned by R.S, nor is it public domain. It's ok to hack and have
fun...just don't sell or distribute the results...
----------------
Kim Kempf, Microware Systems Corporation {sun,uunet}!mcrware!kimeaston@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) (03/26/89)
aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: >=Has anyone actually ported the OS9 from coco's to other machines? Do I >=need to buy a coco III just to reassemble the drivers for my uniboard SBC? >=Is there enough technical descriptions of the drivers (source code >=hopefully) in the documentation that comes with the package? Is it a >=seperate item you have to buy? > >...also required a License Agreement with Microware. Technical information, >support and other help is provided for the license fee. Remember that OS-9 >is not owned by R.S, nor is it public domain. It's ok to hack and have >fun...just don't sell or distribute the results... >---------------- >Kim Kempf, Microware Systems Corporation Okay, (raises right hand) "I promise to have fun" :> :> :> I never intended to sell this, remember, the target board is no longer sold or supported. As far as I know, I'm the only one that ever bought one. Some time ago, I wrote to Microware and asked for literature on OS9. They sent me info that included prices for buying a license to "roll my own" system. It seemed that the cheapest price was many hundreds of dollars. Kinda expensive for a hobbiest that just wants to run a neat OS on his 6809 SBC. Since just about any Radio Shack I go to has OS9 on the shelf I got the idea to fork out 79.95 and roll my own drivers. A much cheaper route to go. I'm not a lawyer, just an engineer. Am I getting myself in deep leagal trouble by not doing this in the "approved" way? Jeff Easton Zenith Data Systems Remember, ZDS proabaly doesnt know what OS9 is (although I've tried to talk Heath into it :> ) See above disclaimer about being a hobbiest.
wynkoop@esquire.UUCP (Brett Wynkoop) (03/27/89)
In article <989@mcrware.UUCP>, kim@mcrware.UUCP (Kim Kempf) writes: > In article <386@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: > =Has anyone actually ported the OS9 from coco's to other machines? Do I > =need to buy a coco III just to reassemble the drivers for my uniboard SBC? > =Is there enough technical descriptions of the drivers (source code > =hopefully) in the documentation that comes with the package? Is it a > =seperate item you have to buy? > = > ...also required a License Agreement with Microware. Technical information, > support and other help is provided for the license fee. Remember that OS-9 > is not owned by R.S, nor is it public domain. It's ok to hack and have > fun...just don't sell or distribute the results... > ---------------- > Kim Kempf, Microware Systems Corporation {sun,uunet}!mcrware!kim Greeting- I just want to know when Microware started to care about its 6809 products again. When I try to talk to them at trade shows or on the phone about the 6809 products they as a rule try to stear me to a 68k system running OSk. I would probably go for it, but the cost of the compilers are out of sight! $750 to $1000 for a C compiler depending on which vendor of course is a bit much if you ask me. Is os9 the number one os in japan because of more competitave pricing? If you folks are supporting OS9-6809 in a real way why can't I get any ethernet software for it. When I inquired about ethernet I was told "sorry only 68K" Sometimes I think Microware can't even remember what a 6809 is. -Brett (ok now I have my asbestos suit on) uucp.....cmcl2!esquire!wynkoop CIS......72057,3720
sampson@killer.Dallas.TX.US (Steve Sampson) (03/27/89)
I also looked into the pricing of a 68020 OSK and nearly had a heart attack. The 6809 stuff should be given away by now, or at least in the < $100 range. OSK is priced about the same as Unix, but is made for micro-controller systems as it lacks any real tools. The C compiler would save alot of time in the design of a microwave oven, but is less than or equal to a PDP-11 compiler of the early 70's.
ag@floyd.ATT.COM (03/27/89)
> Some time ago, I wrote to Microware and asked for literature on OS9. > They sent me info that included prices for buying a license to "roll > my own" system. It seemed that the cheapest price was many hundreds > of dollars. Kinda expensive for a hobbiest that just wants to run > a neat OS on his 6809 SBC. Since just about any Radio Shack I go to > has OS9 on the shelf I got the idea to fork out 79.95 and roll my own > drivers. A much cheaper route to go. You mean I finally found somwthing that the Shack sells cheaper than their supplier? What a concept!!! I thought of porting os9/68K to a homebrew 68000 board I have, but after reading these articles, I think I'm cured!!! BTW, what's os9 cost for the Atari ST? Also, is it available for the Mac? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= ________ /_______/| __________________________ | ||----->/ / Ag Primatic | ||<----/_________________________/ ag@floyd.ATT.com |_______|/ / / / / / / / / / / / /oooooooo/ /_________________________/ /oooooooo/ --------- -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
kim@mcrware.UUCP (Kim Kempf) (03/27/89)
In article <1089@esquire.UUCP> wynkoop@esquire.UUCP (Brett Wynkoop) writes: >In article <989@mcrware.UUCP>, kim@mcrware.UUCP (Kim Kempf) writes: >> In article <386@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: >> =hopefully) in the documentation that comes with the package? Is it a >> =seperate item you have to buy? >> = >> ...also required a License Agreement with Microware. Technical information, >Greeting- > I just want to know when Microware started to care about its 6809 >products again. When I try to talk to them at trade shows or on the phone Microware cares about all its products. The comment was prompted by the reference to the CoCo version of OS-9. Unfortunately, the market is different and cannot bear the prices charged for professional software products, hence Microware reluctance to put much effort into the CoCo market. Besides, the OS-9 on the CoCo is Tandy's product (they licenced exclusive rights). >about the 6809 products they as a rule try to stear me to a 68k system >running OSk. I would probably go for it, but the cost of the compilers are >out of sight! $750 to $1000 for a C compiler depending on which vendor of >course is a bit much if you ask me. Again, OS-9 is a professional product and the market requires support and service which commands the higher prices. >Is os9 the number one os in japan because of more competitave pricing? OS-9 is not the number one operating system in Japan, its MSDOS. Nor is it cheap. OS-9 has the same effect no matter what machine it is ported to: it tends to displace the existing operating system. This happened in the CoCO and on the FM-11 series in Japan. The 68k version has been released in Japan for the Sharp X68000 and will probably have the same effect. BTW, the price for the latter in converted yen is $180. The 68K C compiler costs $550. >If you folks are supporting OS9-6809 in a real way why can't I get any >ethernet software for it. When I inquired about ethernet I was told >"sorry only 68K" Because ethernet software requires ethernet hardware and there is little demand for either in the 6809 market. >Sometimes I think Microware can't even remember what a 6809 is. > Sure we remember what it *was*. In 1988 we sold 2 or 3 new 6809 licences... ---------------- Kim Kempf, Microware Systems Corporation {sun,uunet}!mcrware!kim
kim@mcrware.UUCP (Kim Kempf) (03/27/89)
In article <388@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: >>=hopefully) in the documentation that comes with the package? Is it a >>=seperate item you have to buy? >>...also required a License Agreement with Microware. Technical information, >>support and other help is provided for the license fee. Remember that OS-9 >>Okay, (raises right hand) "I promise to have fun" :> :> :> > >I'm not a lawyer, just an engineer. Am I getting myself in deep >leagal trouble by not doing this in the "approved" way? > Neither am I Jeff but I don't think there is much anyone can do to anyone in this instance. The point I wanted to make (just like the AT&T dudes do for UNIX) is that OS-9 is not public domain just because it's easy to obtain. There have been unpleasant instances in the past where such ports to sell without licence from Microware. Someone that wants to hack up a version of OS-9 for other hardware for fun at home can be my guest. Just get lots of experience and try to get your employer to buy OS-9! :-) ---------------- Kim Kempf, Microware Systems Corporation {sun,uunet}!mcrware!kim
easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) (03/28/89)
> Tim Koonce writes: > >The big hassle with getting it running will be interrupts. The CoCo >interrupts are fairly bizarre. Time-slicing works off of a 60hz timer >driven by the video circuitry. Some interrupts are wired as FIRQ, >rather than IRQ, which is what OS9 was originally designed to use, >and the CoCo OS9 kernel has some code to hack an FIRQ stack frame >into an IRQ stack frame for compatibility with the rest. Hmmm, My 6522 has two 16 bit timers. With a E clock at 2 Mhz, /65535 yielding a maximum of 30.5 Hz or 32.8 mSec between IRQ's (not the FIRQ). so far, so good... >As for Level 1 that Tandy is selling, their Level 1 off the shelf is >ver. 1.2, which won't run on the CoCo 3 as-is, due to some additional >memory restrictions on the CoCo3. However, there's an upgrade for >$25 to ver. 2.0, which does run on the CoCo 3 just fine. It might >actually be easiest to pick up a CoCo 1 or CoCo 2 at a flea market >used, and work with that. Be a lot cheaper, certainly. Okay, but does version 2.0 (not level II) buy me anything? Is it a bug fix release? Will 2.0 run on a coco 1 or 2? (assuming I scrap up a coco 1 or 2 to port it on). I would like to get the best version possible. One other question, do I need DMA for the disk transfers? My board has a 6844 DMA chip but I confess, I've never used it. >Hope this helps. A big step in the right direction. > > - Tim Koonce Jeff Easton Zenith Data Systems
lnewman@emdeng.Dayton.NCR.COM (Lee.A.Newman) (03/29/89)
In article <386@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: >Okay, level 2 is out. I could use it later after I build that 2 Meg >bank switching RAM disk I'm thinking about :> If all you want the extra memory for is a ramdisk, yes, I agree with you that level 2 is out. The advantage af level 2 is that you can have more than one process running in its own 64K process space. Here's my guess at a scenario for porting it. [Coco OS9 to Jeff's system] > > 1> Buy the OS9 level I & the assembler package OS9 level 1 comes with the assembler. (No extra charge!) > 2> Rewrite the 6551 ACIA drivers for the deluxe RS232 pak > for my 6551 at a different address. sounds easy No need to rewrite, unless you don't like the driver. With OS9, all you have to do is change the address in the descriptor. > 3> Rewrite the disk drivers for my WD 1793 disk controller > what chip does the coco use? a WD 17xx I think I'm not sure, but I do know it is a WD 179x. (1797 maybe???) > 4> Write a boot strap loader for OS9 > 5> At this point I should be able to boot OS9 with a > terminal connected to my serial port. I then > can write the drivers for my video (MC6845 based) and > keyboard (7 bit ASCII w/strobe). If you can find someone with the OS9 drivers for a Coco WORDPAK or WORDPAK II, this addon board for the coco uses a 6845. I beleive it was manufactured by PBJ. > >Does OS9 require a timer for switching processes? I have a 6522 VIA >with 2 8 bit timers. Is this sufficent? The coco uses a 60 Hz timer interrupt. It only has one timer. Lee Newman lnewman@emdeng.dayton.NCR.com
koonce@brahms.berkeley.edu (tim koonce) (03/30/89)
Jeff Easton writes: >> Tim Koonce writes: >>The big hassle with getting it running will be interrupts. >Hmmm, My 6522 has two 16 bit timers. With a E clock at 2 Mhz, /65535 >yielding a maximum of 30.5 Hz or 32.8 mSec between IRQ's (not the FIRQ). >so far, so good... You will have to hack the boot code to set up that timer properly, but that shouldn't be too hard. >Okay, but does version 2.0 (not level II) buy me anything? Is it a bug >fix release? Will 2.0 run on a coco 1 or 2? (assuming I scrap up a coco 1 >or 2 to port it on). I would like to get the best version possible. ver. 2.0 of Level I will definitely run on a CoCo 1 or 2. It changes a few things, but mostly it includes a few new utilities, and some new drivers. Nothing which is particularly interesting for your project, but some of it might be nice to get eventually. >One other question, do I need DMA for the disk transfers? My board has >a 6844 DMA chip but I confess, I've never used it. The CoCo floppy I/O code uses the processor to supervise the transfer. It requires that the 1773/1793 FDC chip be connected to the processor Halt line. The basic idea is that the processor runs a tight loop transferring data from the FDC, and the FDC halts the processor until the next byte is ready. It wreaks havoc with multi-user systems, since sector transfers are non-interruptable, but works fine for single-user stuff. While you're hacking drivers, though, putting together a floppy driver to use that DMA chip might be nice. The biggest practical problem with the CoCo Level 1 floppy driver is simply that it's hard-coded for 35 track single-sided operation, which is a pain. D.P. Johnson sells a 'real' driver for it which supports any format up to 80 track double-sided. - Tim Koonce
easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) (04/09/89)
Here comes the expensive solution ... :> All you guys basically talked me out of trying to do a blind port of OS9 to my Uniboard system. Since Rainbowfest/Chicago is comming up in about a week, I'm thinking of driving over there and picking up a Coco 3 and a disk controller if there are any good deals. I can then buy OS9 level 2 and use that setup. If I get real comfortable with the system I may try the port. A couple of questions about what to types of hardware to avoid. 1> How can I tell that the coco 3 I buy wont have the infamous "sparklly" problem? Or has the problem even been fixed on late production units? Is there a board rev # or such I can look for? 2> What are your recommendations for a floppy controller? I'm leaning Toward a Disto II controller. It is of the no-halt variety and has a bonus of some type of "port" where other modules can be attached. I may use this feature to add a custom board with my ACIA/VIA setup off the Uniboard to help in the port. Comments? Suggestions? Jeff Easton Zenith Data Systems Disclaimer: I cant be *paid* enough to speak for *anybody*. UUCP: mailrus!sharkey!aucis!easton
phaedrus@flatline.UUCP (james hartman) (04/10/89)
In article <401@aucis.UUCP> easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: >2> What are your recommendations for a floppy controller? I'm leaning > Toward a Disto II controller. It is of the no-halt variety and has > a bonus of some type of "port" where other modules can be attached. > > Jeff Easton This kind of controller is necessary if you plan on doing any multi- tasking (and why would you be going to OS-9 if you weren't?), especially in a multi-user situation. I'm using the old Rat Shack controller, and the only reason why I haven't bought a new one is because I'm working on getting a hard drive instead. You can always pick up hardware and software at extremely low prices at the Rainbowfests - makes me wish they'd have one close enough to where I could justify the cost of traveling to one! Going to Chicago just to spend MORE money on my computer just doesn't seem to be a very cost- effective way to purchase equipment. Rainbowfest Houston? I doubt it somehow... -- Standard disclaimers apply. Your mileage may vary. Batteries not included. Void where prohibited by law. Some assembly required. Not available in all areas. James E. Hartman / phaedrus@flatline.uucp / uunet!sugar!flatline!phaedrus
mdg@macs.UUCP (Mark Griffith) (04/10/89)
In article <401@aucis.UUCP>, easton@aucis.UUCP (Jeff Easton) writes: > > 1> How can I tell that the coco 3 I buy wont have the infamous "sparklly" > problem? Or has the problem even been fixed on late production units? > Is there a board rev # or such I can look for? > You can't really, but it is easy to fix most of the time if you do get a machine that has this problem. I had it when I first got mine, and simply replacing the Motorola CPU with one from AMI fixed it cleaner than you would think. There are others methods too, some not soe easy, some are. Asking here or on Compuserve OS9 Forum will get you through that problem if it should pop up. I'm told many of the newer machines don't have sparklies. > 2> What are your recommendations for a floppy controller? I'm leaning > Toward a Disto II controller. It is of the no-halt variety and has > a bonus of some type of "port" where other modules can be attached. > I may use this feature to add a custom board with my ACIA/VIA > setup off the Uniboard to help in the port. > I would highly recommend the Disto SCII and it's add-on boards. I have used them since they first came out and have only praise for Tony and his products. Another good alternative (and just as good a product) is the new "Eliminator" board from Frank Hogg Labs, made by Bruce Isted. This one has 2 serial ports, a parallel port, floppy and hard disk controllers all built into it. For the hard disk all you need is an add-on Western Digital board and the disk itself. Pretty slick system. /\/\ark Griffith
ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer III) (04/13/89)
Excerpts from ext.nn.comp.os.os9: 10-Apr-89 Re: Adapting coco OS9 to ot.. Mark Griffith@macs.UUCP (1576): > Another good alternative (and just as good a product) is > the new "Eliminator" board from Frank Hogg Labs, made by Bruce Isted. > This one has 2 serial ports, a parallel port, floppy and hard disk > controllers all built into it. For the hard disk all you need is an > add-on Western Digital board and the disk itself. Pretty slick system. Yes, pretty slick. Unfortunately I've been on a waiting list for mine since about November or December. Every time I call Frank Hogg Labs, I'm told the system is almost ready. "Probably next month," they say. I'm still waiting, but my money may not (I could really use a new car. . . .). Walt Wimer Carnegie Mellon University Internet: ww0n@andrew.cmu.edu Bitnet: ww0n%andrew.cmu.edu@cmccvb UUCP: ...!psuvax1!andrew.cmu.edu!ww0n
mdg@macs.UUCP (Mark Griffith) (04/14/89)
In article <oYEzc9y00aQeM0Z3t7@andrew.cmu.edu>, ww0n+@andrew.cmu.edu (Walter Lloyd Wimer III) writes: > > > Another good alternative (and just as good a product) is > > the new "Eliminator" board from Frank Hogg Labs, made by Bruce Isted. > > This one has 2 serial ports, a parallel port, floppy and hard disk > > controllers all built into it. For the hard disk all you need is an > > add-on Western Digital board and the disk itself. Pretty slick system. > > Yes, pretty slick. Unfortunately I've been on a waiting list for mine since > about November or December. Every time I call Frank Hogg Labs, I'm told the > system is almost ready. "Probably next month," they say. I'm still waiting, > but my money may not (I could really use a new car. . . .). Yes, this is true....Bruce has been working on it for some time. I say a prototype at the RainbowFest in Princeton that he had hand-wired. Opps....should be 'saw' instead of 'say' above *8^)= All I can say is keep waiting...it will be worth it. Bruce is a very inventive individual and his work is always excellent. Mark UUCP: mdg@macs BITNET: GRIFFITH@STETSON