9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
* [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
@ 2021-02-23  7:17 rt9f.3141
  2021-02-23 10:29 ` Steve Simon
                   ` (2 more replies)
  0 siblings, 3 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: rt9f.3141 @ 2021-02-23  7:17 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 575 bytes --]

Hello,

I'm wondering about the history of the 68000 compiler/tools.  Support for the 68020 makes sense, it had an MMU, but 68000 did not.  And it had some design flaws that prevented it from working correctly with the external MMU, the 68451.  So why does/did Plan 9 have a 68000 compiler?  Did Plan 9 ever run on an MMU-less 68000?

thx.
------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M62b7ac10b0006c58d077c900
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1138 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-23  7:17 [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l? rt9f.3141
@ 2021-02-23 10:29 ` Steve Simon
  2021-02-24 19:59   ` Anthony Sorace
  2021-02-24 20:14 ` Joseph Stewart
  2021-02-24 21:49 ` Skip Tavakkolian
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Steve Simon @ 2021-02-23 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

I don't believe a 68000 compiler was ever released by the labs but there
may have been one - some blit terminals had 68000s (and maybe gnots?) so
its plausable.

There was a port of the plan9 compilers to the VAX but I think its
sourcecode was lost (jmk found an executable some years).

-Steve

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M93c386537b2c045b411b3708
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-23 10:29 ` Steve Simon
@ 2021-02-24 19:59   ` Anthony Sorace
  0 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Anthony Sorace @ 2021-02-24 19:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

The compiler suite has had a few compilers in it which were used for things other than kernel ports. I can’t say about the 68000 specifically, but that would be my guess. The i960 and DSP3210 compilers are other examples. 

> On Feb 23, 2021, at 21:18, Steve Simon <steve@quintile.net> wrote:
> 
> I don't believe a 68000 compiler was ever released by the labs but there
> may have been one - some blit terminals had 68000s (and maybe gnots?) so
> its plausable.
> 
> There was a port of the plan9 compilers to the VAX but I think its
> sourcecode was lost (jmk found an executable some years).
> 
> -Steve

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M918f214afdc5ea36e829ea95
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-23  7:17 [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l? rt9f.3141
  2021-02-23 10:29 ` Steve Simon
@ 2021-02-24 20:14 ` Joseph Stewart
  2021-02-24 23:26   ` Charles Forsyth
  2021-02-24 21:49 ` Skip Tavakkolian
  2 siblings, 1 reply; 8+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Stewart @ 2021-02-24 20:14 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

Charles could probably answer this better than me, but weren't the 68k
compilers made to support Inferno?
-joe

On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:18 PM <rt9f.3141@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hello,
>
> I'm wondering about the history of the 68000 compiler/tools.  Support for the 68020 makes sense, it had an MMU, but 68000 did not.  And it had some design flaws that prevented it from working correctly with the external MMU, the 68451.  So why does/did Plan 9 have a 68000 compiler?  Did Plan 9 ever run on an MMU-less 68000?
>
> thx.
> 9fans / 9fans / see discussions + participants + delivery options Permalink

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M109e864d31355d12fb3ef3b6
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-23  7:17 [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l? rt9f.3141
  2021-02-23 10:29 ` Steve Simon
  2021-02-24 20:14 ` Joseph Stewart
@ 2021-02-24 21:49 ` Skip Tavakkolian
  2 siblings, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Skip Tavakkolian @ 2021-02-24 21:49 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1181 bytes --]

I am speculating that it was to support compiling code for a version of the
Blit. 630MTG used 68000 and DMD5620 used AT&T WE3210.
gnot used the 68020.


On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:18 PM <rt9f.3141@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hello,
>
> I'm wondering about the history of the 68000 compiler/tools.  Support for
> the 68020 makes sense, it had an MMU, but 68000 did not.  And it had some
> design flaws that prevented it from working correctly with the external
> MMU, the 68451.  So why does/did Plan 9 have a 68000 compiler?  Did Plan 9
> ever run on an MMU-less 68000?
>
> thx.
> *9fans <https://9fans.topicbox.com/latest>* / 9fans / see discussions
> <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans> + participants
> <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/members> + delivery options
> <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription> Permalink
> <https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M62b7ac10b0006c58d077c900>
>

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-Ma25c671e619d8a057d82c591
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1651 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-24 20:14 ` Joseph Stewart
@ 2021-02-24 23:26   ` Charles Forsyth
  2021-02-24 23:29     ` Charles Forsyth
  2021-02-25  1:02     ` Joseph Stewart
  0 siblings, 2 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Charles Forsyth @ 2021-02-24 23:26 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1302 bytes --]

I think they might have been there for some other reason and then was used
for Inferno, which they somewhat had going on a Palm Pilot in some form
(not necessarily as the native kernel).
If I waded through a ton of archive material I could probably find the
latter, to see what it was, but I'm not sure it's really worthwhile now.

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 8:16 PM Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Charles could probably answer this better than me, but weren't the 68k
> compilers made to support Inferno?
> -joe
>
> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:18 PM <rt9f.3141@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hello,
> >
> > I'm wondering about the history of the 68000 compiler/tools.  Support
> for the 68020 makes sense, it had an MMU, but 68000 did not.  And it had
> some design flaws that prevented it from working correctly with the
> external MMU, the 68451.  So why does/did Plan 9 have a 68000 compiler?
> Did Plan 9 ever run on an MMU-less 68000?
> >
> > thx.
> > 9fans / 9fans / see discussions + participants + delivery options
> Permalink

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M0d6f8b10f10462355ff6de16
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2656 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-24 23:26   ` Charles Forsyth
@ 2021-02-24 23:29     ` Charles Forsyth
  2021-02-25  1:02     ` Joseph Stewart
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Charles Forsyth @ 2021-02-24 23:29 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1973 bytes --]

To be fair, I probably should convert my machine with lots of disks with
lots of historical partitions into a single tree with the contents just as
subdirectories.
It's not as though anyone's going to use them as images ever again. They
only ended up that way because the originals were in strange formats on
increasingly dodgy devices, and it was easier just to copy the partitions
across to partitions of newer bigger drives.

As an aside, it still amuses me that VN's worm jukebox would now fit on an
SD card that I could easily lose.

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 11:26 PM Charles Forsyth <charles.forsyth@gmail.com>
wrote:

> I think they might have been there for some other reason and then was used
> for Inferno, which they somewhat had going on a Palm Pilot in some form
> (not necessarily as the native kernel).
> If I waded through a ton of archive material I could probably find the
> latter, to see what it was, but I'm not sure it's really worthwhile now.
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 8:16 PM Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Charles could probably answer this better than me, but weren't the 68k
>> compilers made to support Inferno?
>> -joe
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:18 PM <rt9f.3141@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'm wondering about the history of the 68000 compiler/tools.  Support
>> for the 68020 makes sense, it had an MMU, but 68000 did not.  And it had
>> some design flaws that prevented it from working correctly with the
>> external MMU, the 68451.  So why does/did Plan 9 have a 68000 compiler?
>> Did Plan 9 ever run on an MMU-less 68000?
>> >
>> > thx.
>> > 9fans / 9fans / see discussions + participants + delivery options
>> Permalink

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-Mf5d48b33b42aa6f6e483a745
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3631 bytes --]

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

* Re: [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l?
  2021-02-24 23:26   ` Charles Forsyth
  2021-02-24 23:29     ` Charles Forsyth
@ 2021-02-25  1:02     ` Joseph Stewart
  1 sibling, 0 replies; 8+ messages in thread
From: Joseph Stewart @ 2021-02-25  1:02 UTC (permalink / raw)
  To: 9fans

Cool. I had a talk with Bradley (and maybe you Charles) at some past
IW9P about mangling the 68k compilers to support Coldfire but I never
went forward with it. I had inherited supporting a device that was
barely running uCLinux that I REALLY wanted to run Inferno on...

On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 3:27 PM Charles Forsyth
<charles.forsyth@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I think they might have been there for some other reason and then was used for Inferno, which they somewhat had going on a Palm Pilot in some form (not necessarily as the native kernel).
> If I waded through a ton of archive material I could probably find the latter, to see what it was, but I'm not sure it's really worthwhile now.
>
> On Wed, Feb 24, 2021 at 8:16 PM Joseph Stewart <joseph.stewart@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Charles could probably answer this better than me, but weren't the 68k
>> compilers made to support Inferno?
>> -joe
>>
>> On Mon, Feb 22, 2021 at 11:18 PM <rt9f.3141@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hello,
>> >
>> > I'm wondering about the history of the 68000 compiler/tools.  Support for the 68020 makes sense, it had an MMU, but 68000 did not.  And it had some design flaws that prevented it from working correctly with the external MMU, the 68451.  So why does/did Plan 9 have a 68000 compiler?  Did Plan 9 ever run on an MMU-less 68000?
>> >
>> > thx.
>> > 9fans / 9fans / see discussions + participants + delivery options Permalink
>
> 9fans / 9fans / see discussions + participants + delivery options Permalink

------------------------------------------
9fans: 9fans
Permalink: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/Tf34475f1bb69674a-M5d08695f6eacd2fc934cd50c
Delivery options: https://9fans.topicbox.com/groups/9fans/subscription

^ permalink raw reply	[flat|nested] 8+ messages in thread

end of thread, other threads:[~2021-02-25  1:03 UTC | newest]

Thread overview: 8+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed)
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2021-02-23  7:17 [9fans] 2c/2l make sense, but why 1c/1l? rt9f.3141
2021-02-23 10:29 ` Steve Simon
2021-02-24 19:59   ` Anthony Sorace
2021-02-24 20:14 ` Joseph Stewart
2021-02-24 23:26   ` Charles Forsyth
2021-02-24 23:29     ` Charles Forsyth
2021-02-25  1:02     ` Joseph Stewart
2021-02-24 21:49 ` Skip Tavakkolian

9fans - fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs

This inbox may be cloned and mirrored by anyone:

	git clone --mirror http://inbox.vuxu.org/9fans

	# If you have public-inbox 1.1+ installed, you may
	# initialize and index your mirror using the following commands:
	public-inbox-init -V1 9fans 9fans/ http://inbox.vuxu.org/9fans \
		9fans@9fans.net
	public-inbox-index 9fans

Example config snippet for mirrors.
Newsgroup available over NNTP:
	nntp://inbox.vuxu.org/vuxu.archive.9fans


AGPL code for this site: git clone https://public-inbox.org/public-inbox.git