03 June 2020, 15:00 | #521 |
Registered User
Join Date: May 2020
Location: Lausanne Switzerland
Posts: 14
|
Wasn't AmigaOS 3.2 already released by Escom for the walker?
|
03 June 2020, 18:14 | #522 |
Total Chaos forever!
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Waterville, MN, USA
Age: 49
Posts: 2,186
|
The Walker was never released.
|
03 June 2020, 19:05 | #523 |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 795
|
I have a general question...
is 3.1.4 (and 3.2) structural identical to 3.1 or are there changes? |
03 June 2020, 19:44 | #524 | |
Camilla, AmigaOS Dev.
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Frederiksberg
Posts: 327
|
Quote:
Think of it as a house. We have replaced the floor in one room painted everything, repaired the broken windows, moved a wall 30 cm, and built a new garage. Is the house structurally the same. I'd say yes, as we certainly didn't tear down the old house first. |
|
03 June 2020, 21:20 | #525 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 795
|
Quote:
The question is... would it still work with 3.1.4 (or 3.2)? Of course datatypes are changed (as example) but it still would work I want to make a version of my distribution based on 3.1 that still works on 3.1.4 or 3.2 or generally said... if I do a distribution for 3.1 would it work on 3.1.4 or do I have to test it on 3.1.4 (or 3.2) additionally? Last edited by OlafSch; 03 June 2020 at 21:27. |
|
03 June 2020, 23:05 | #526 |
WinUAE 4000/40, V4SA
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: East of Oshawa
Posts: 538
|
You should still test anyway, but I believe the general guide is that if you're not writing patches, then what works on 3.1 should work on 3.1.4 more or less the same; it's merely bug fixes and some backported features from 3.5 and 3.9 that don't change anything already existing.
For 3.2, I think we'll probably just have to wait and see. |
03 June 2020, 23:10 | #527 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Nuernberg
Posts: 795
|
Quote:
|
|
04 June 2020, 01:15 | #528 |
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Des Moines, IA
Age: 58
Posts: 88
|
so looking forward to OS 3.2 - ready to buy in a heartbeat
love supporting on-going Amiga development |
04 June 2020, 06:03 | #529 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 99
|
IIRC the upper 2GB memory area was reserved for a Motorola idea of memory protection. Lower 2GB being alterable and upper 2GB being read only.
So how about OS support for multi processing. Our physical CPU's are speed limited, so the only way forward is to use more of them at the same time. How about CPU_0 + CPU_SMP(1-4) So everything which must run in the usual way does in the lower 2GB. But when possible (newly written and compiled for new system?), programs are passed onto the SMP complex in the upper 2GB. I'm guessing the master CPU would have to be the one which moves things from lower to upper and back. For example you could have five 040 processors. Bottom 040 works as normal, except it gets rid of anything it can onto the co-processor complex. That complex runs a different exec which is perhaps pulled from BSD and tuned for threads instead of tasks. Or maybe a t unable system where you can change how the scheduling is performed. I'm interested to make such hardware and send it to you. But working in with the OS may affect how the design is done. I'm thinking about a couple of options including the Renesas TSI109 PPC PCI Host Bridge chip using FPGA glue for 040 or 060. And as mentioned CPU_0 as one, and several processors all as CPU_1 sharing an L3 Cache. The hardware (chips) has been around 15 years to do this, it would just need some FPGA glue. |
04 June 2020, 07:01 | #530 | |
BoingBagged
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 46
Posts: 2,358
|
Quote:
When doing a distro you should always test first. The directory layout has not changed much in 3.2 but the functionality has. The change in functionality will mean that many programs you are used to add to overcome some limitations are no longer required. So better see what has changed first and then plug in what you want. My advice is that you make a list of what you would want to add to 3.1.4.1, so that when the complete feature set of 3.2 is out, you compare and discard what is not needed and maybe even decide to add something else. |
|
04 June 2020, 07:14 | #531 | |
BoingBagged
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 46
Posts: 2,358
|
Quote:
My advice is to always play nice with the Amiga hardware and its OS to ensure proper operation and compatibility. You can hack things to get them going, but their resulting operation will be compromised at some point. There are lot of Amiga hardware expansion designs, and even some that are currently on sale, that hack their way into the system. The result of this is not optimal. But better than hearing me repeating it, just learn from their mistakes. Use AutoConfig. |
|
04 June 2020, 07:33 | #532 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Earth
Posts: 884
|
Quote:
Quote:
I don't think so...as I've considered offering my CybervisionPPC as help from the States. I Agree about CGFX. Aside, I didn't offer to move AWAY from CGX4.. I had considered the offer for both ways. Quote:
Last edited by AC/DC HACKER!; 04 June 2020 at 07:50. |
|||
04 June 2020, 08:29 | #533 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,215
|
Quote:
Unfortunately, Forbid() is not even an exec function, it is also a macro that just increments a counter in ExecBase. That is not at all sufficient to stop another CPU from executing any critical code. Thus, please understand: AmigaOs is a museum piece. It is not a modern operating system, and it cannot be made a modern operating system. If you want something modern and scalable, there are many alternatives. |
|
04 June 2020, 11:39 | #534 | |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 99
|
Quote:
There is a software problem to be solved before a hardware solution can be created. And so no point trying to push the boundaries. And that you say there is no intention to make that fix this? Did I get that right? |
|
04 June 2020, 11:41 | #535 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 99
|
Are there other ways that multi processing hardware on Amiga can successfully work on the software?
|
04 June 2020, 12:04 | #536 |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Amigaplanet
Posts: 645
|
Why?
|
04 June 2020, 12:58 | #537 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jul 2018
Location: Stockholm / Sweden
Posts: 107
|
I also wonder why. The thing with Amigas and AmigaOS is to make it and software that runs swift in a minimalistic environment. It's a challenge. Adding more processors and so on kind of takes away what Amiga is. Make it possible to create bloated and unoptimised software and you have Windows. What's the point with that?
This is the main reason I don't like emulators and software created that only runs in them. If it can't run on an at least an unaccellerated A1200 then it's useless to the community, in my opinion. Now, I'm not a programmer, haven't been for 25 years at least, but I enjoy playing around and making things work on my two Amigas. I want an OS that works on them and allows to use old software. Creating something that eventually will demand huge and expensive hardware upgrades will not benefit the community at all, it will only destroy it. |
04 June 2020, 13:02 | #538 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,215
|
That is not a "fix". That is a "ditch it, loose compatibility, and restart from scratch".
|
04 June 2020, 16:28 | #539 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2018
Location: Australia
Age: 51
Posts: 99
|
|
04 June 2020, 16:56 | #540 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin, then Glasgow
Posts: 6,334
|
I'm not aware of ports of either KiCAD or any FPGA compilers to Amiga OS. And whatever about a compiler that might be portable, KiCAD has a massive list of dependencies that would need to be sorted first, before even starting to worry about the lack of multiple CPUs. The lack of multiple CPU support isn't the limiting factor here, not by a long shot.
There are lots of things that benefit from as much CPU power as you can give them, and that's not much different now than it was back in the day. Some of that is of course personal choice, even back in the day I wanted more speed than the A500 or A1200 could give me stock, and to me it's silly to limit myself to such basic hardware unless that a specific aim (e.g. developing a game for a standard spec). Yes, more speed is always good, but there's a limit to what's practical. If you're looking for a modern system with modern features to support modern software, put an Amiga skin on your favourite Linux distro. |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests) | |
Thread Tools | |
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AmigaOS 3.1.x v 3.9 | steve_mynott | New to Emulation or Amiga scene | 35 | 19 April 2020 06:23 |
AmigaOS 3.9 | PoLoMoTo | support.WinUAE | 8 | 27 August 2011 18:06 |
AmigaOS 3.5 or 3.9 | maddoc666 | support.Apps | 12 | 22 February 2010 08:02 |
AmigaOS | koncool | request.Apps | 6 | 04 June 2003 17:45 |
AmigaOS XL | sturme | New to Emulation or Amiga scene | 4 | 15 January 2002 02:13 |
|
|