68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
Posted by Nick on 6 June 2000, 16:07 GMT
Resident Linux (guru/zealot) Henrik emailed me today with a link to some posts on the Linux kernel mailing list about porting the Linux kernel to the 89/92+. Some new topics have been addressed by many people in the Linux and Open Source communities, making things hopeful once again to see this OS ported over.
|
|
|
The comments below are written by ticalc.org visitors. Their views are not necessarily those of ticalc.org, and ticalc.org takes no responsibility for their content.
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
Andrew Magness
(Web Page)
|
Bah... this was a big hoax a few months ago... It's just not practical... Its not like we need the stability.... its a calculator... we dont need the power... we have a 16mhx processor... we dont need the purty X.... we have 160x160 (89) pixels and 4 shades of gray... Its just a calculator...
|
|
6 June 2000, 17:30 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
Amalfi Marini
|
After 1000 emails I sent to 1000 linux worlds, asking a minilinux for my ti89 , then we got an answer. It's like close contact with The Third Kind, but it's ok anyway. Actually, linux can run in a 68k based machine, like the old Atari St and Apple mac. So, why not in a Ti89 that has almost the same capabilities of these machines ? Why sould I wait for a (ams2.03) prosit version ? It doesn't need to be a exactly the same as the real 68k-linux, I want something like prosit, then, porting programs to it, and that's all. Maybe we don't need a gaphical interface.
TI89-linux, then tell this to our Very Good Friends of all life, HP users.
|
|
6 June 2000, 20:37 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
mmu_man
(Web Page)
|
Amalfi Marini:
I have this project for a long time, but I lack time actually... but in 2 weeks, I'll be in holydays, so I'll try to compile Linux for ti68k...
but Linux is just for fun :)
Thank you for telling about Prosit :)
As the current maintainer for Prosit, I can say some facts for the future:
- try to converge to POSIX compliance
- try to implement a VFS
- try to implement TCP/IP... (and a lib for plain doors progs)
Faisal A:
GtkTilink should be easily ported to BeOS since Gtk already exist for it and POSIX api exist also.
hogbog:
have you checked http://dba.ticalc.org/ ? You can have more RAM in your calc...
|
|
6 June 2000, 21:24 GMT
|
|
V2OS
|
Platypii
|
I think what we really need here is a v2os!!!
http://v2os.v2.nl/
|
|
6 June 2000, 21:59 GMT
|
|
Not quite on topic...
|
Paulo Marques
|
I'm not a Linux user (yet!, no space...), so I don't think I can say much about it. But the other day I heard a news somewhere that FLASH memory will be getting cheaper (I think a new company is developing new technology). While Linux now on the 89 might seem hard to do, what about when we have more memory on our calculators, can you imagine the things that will be possible?
Just ranting...
---
Cd_Slayer
|
|
6 June 2000, 23:16 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
mmu_man
(Web Page)
|
BTW: there had been already a lot of discutions on the ti-fr ( http://www.ti-fr.org/ ) forum about that and TCP/IP, and other stuff... it's in french (well, sorry but worth a read)
|
|
6 June 2000, 23:18 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
TheWog
(Web Page)
|
Whoa, like, GtkTiLink 89!
(Brain explodes)
|
|
7 June 2000, 18:48 GMT
|
|
The reason _why_ this won't work as stated, and what to do about it
|
Nick Clark
|
See, which it would be well and good for linux to run on a 92, there simply isn't the memory for kernel and application suite written in C. Now, what would be more useful would be if somebody pulled a V2OS, and wrote the kernel, bin utils, shell, login scripts, and libraries in pure M68k ASM. The problem with that, howevery, is that in order to be useful one would need to write _all_ the software in asm, which would be an enormous pain in the butt. Thus, if Linux ran on the 92, you'd effectively have a fried calc with the ability to boot into linux, and display the contents of the root DIR.
On the other hand, if somebody built an interface for the connecter port and coded the drivers for it, one could attach storage units _to_ the linkport, which _might_ make it feasible. If you think about it, the most useful thing that one could do (although I don't know what the speed limitations on the linkport are), would be to code the kernel normally, code all of the bare-bones software in pure ASM, which would reduce the size down to about 10-20k total, plus maybe 350k for the kernel. Included inside of that kernel, one of the most important things, would be a driver that would allow the linkport (when attached to a graphlink), to function as a standard COM port. Then, things could get interesting.
|
|
8 June 2000, 06:57 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
Z86MON
|
You know what would be cool? MacOS on the 68K TI's! Of course it will run, it runs fine on my black and white Mac SE with 800K disks, 1MB RAM, and a 8 MHz 68000! It provides a great user interface, and it's very expandable through extensions, control panels, etc. It uses mostly the mouse (could be done through the arrow keys), and there are few typed-out commands.
|
|
9 June 2000, 14:06 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
Kenneth Arnold
|
Hi. This is Kenneth. Any questions? :)
|
|
9 June 2000, 23:44 GMT
|
|
Re: 68K Linux Ported to 89/92+?
|
Henk Poley
|
I know these links are already on the page...
linux for the MC68000-processor:
http://www.uClinux.org/
-and-
http:/www.uClinuc.com/
I've e-mailed the guy who ownes the site. And sayed I'm going to post the URL here. If he could stand by for a e-mail-rush.
Don't think that this will happen, but though...
|
|
10 June 2000, 15:43 GMT
|
|
1 2 3
You can change the number of comments per page in Account Preferences.
|