Paul Koning
On Oct 24, 2010, at 8:07 PM, Steve Davidson wrote:
Paul Koning
=20
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
=20
I've been doing some work on it to clean it up. For one thing, it =
now =3D
builds, which certainly is a useful start... :-)
=20
I've been playing with the idea of writing an 82586 driver (UGH!) for =
=3D
the Pro for RSTS, and seeing how disgustingly sick that chip is, =
doing =3D
it from scratch, or even seriously transforming existing assembly =3D
language drivers, is an unpleasant notion. On the other hand, doing =
it =3D
in C (more precisely, borrowing from, say, the NetBSD driver, changed =
as =3D
needed) seems more palatable.
=20
I *think* gcc is close to being able to handle that job. So I'll =3D
probably be using it for that purpose. Am I the only user of that =3D
compiler or are there others?
=20
paul
=20
=20
=20
Paul,
=20
Will "gcc" build for the VAX (or Alpha) so it can be used as a cross =
compiler
for the 11's on those platforms?
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes to both, but I don't know from =
personal experience.
paul
Paul,
STARS:: has the RSX AME installed. It would be very easy to test this.
-Steve
Paul Koning
On Oct 24, 2010, at 8:07 PM, Steve Davidson wrote:
Paul Koning
=20
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
=20
I've been doing some work on it to clean it up. For one thing, it =
now =3D
builds, which certainly is a useful start... :-)
=20
I've been playing with the idea of writing an 82586 driver (UGH!) for =
=3D
the Pro for RSTS, and seeing how disgustingly sick that chip is, =
doing =3D
it from scratch, or even seriously transforming existing assembly =3D
language drivers, is an unpleasant notion. On the other hand, doing =
it =3D
in C (more precisely, borrowing from, say, the NetBSD driver, changed =
as =3D
needed) seems more palatable.
=20
I *think* gcc is close to being able to handle that job. So I'll =3D
probably be using it for that purpose. Am I the only user of that =3D
compiler or are there others?
=20
paul
=20
=20
=20
Paul,
=20
Will "gcc" build for the VAX (or Alpha) so it can be used as a cross =
compiler
for the 11's on those platforms?
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes to both, but I don't know from =
personal experience.
paul
If you wish to push it to STARS:: we can sure find out soon enough!
-Steve
On Oct 24, 2010, at 8:07 PM, Steve Davidson wrote:
Paul Koning
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
I've been doing some work on it to clean it up. For one thing, it now =
builds, which certainly is a useful start... :-)
I've been playing with the idea of writing an 82586 driver (UGH!) for =
the Pro for RSTS, and seeing how disgustingly sick that chip is, doing =
it from scratch, or even seriously transforming existing assembly =
language drivers, is an unpleasant notion. On the other hand, doing it =
in C (more precisely, borrowing from, say, the NetBSD driver, changed as =
needed) seems more palatable.
I *think* gcc is close to being able to handle that job. So I'll =
probably be using it for that purpose. Am I the only user of that =
compiler or are there others?
paul
Paul,
Will "gcc" build for the VAX (or Alpha) so it can be used as a cross compiler
for the 11's on those platforms?
I'm pretty sure the answer is yes to both, but I don't know from personal experience.
paul
Paul Koning
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
I've been doing some work on it to clean it up. For one thing, it now =
builds, which certainly is a useful start... :-)
I've been playing with the idea of writing an 82586 driver (UGH!) for =
the Pro for RSTS, and seeing how disgustingly sick that chip is, doing =
it from scratch, or even seriously transforming existing assembly =
language drivers, is an unpleasant notion. On the other hand, doing it =
in C (more precisely, borrowing from, say, the NetBSD driver, changed as =
needed) seems more palatable.
I *think* gcc is close to being able to handle that job. So I'll =
probably be using it for that purpose. Am I the only user of that =
compiler or are there others?
paul
Paul,
Will "gcc" build for the VAX (or Alpha) so it can be used as a cross compiler
for the 11's on those platforms?
-Steve
What a pity you didn't mention the Texas MSP430 single-chip system instead ;-)
Quote from: http://www.eg3.com/msp430.htm
"The MSP430 is a micro-controller family from Texas Instruments. Built around a 16-bit CPU, the MSP430 is designed for low cost, low power consumption embedded applications. The architecture is reminiscent of the DEC PDP-11. "
My first views upon this architecture makes me wonder where quite some of the addressing modes went, but this is certainly closer to a real PDP than any AVR!
All my best' to all PDP fan s
/G ran
On 2010-10-23 17:36, Paul Koning wrote:
GCC is way too big to fit on a PDP11. But it makes a fine cross-compiler. In fact, it can cross-compile for lots of smaller things, like AVR single chip microcontrollers (things that cost only a dollar or two).
paul
On Oct 23, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 08:45:53PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
No, but I'm curious. Do you mean to run in on a PDP-11 or would you use
it to cross compile stuff?.
/P
GCC is way too big to fit on a PDP11. But it makes a fine cross-compiler. In fact, it can cross-compile for lots of smaller things, like AVR single chip microcontrollers (things that cost only a dollar or two).
paul
On Oct 23, 2010, at 10:47 AM, Pontus Pihlgren wrote:
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 08:45:53PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
No, but I'm curious. Do you mean to run in on a PDP-11 or would you use
it to cross compile stuff?.
/P
On Fri, Oct 22, 2010 at 08:45:53PM -0400, Paul Koning wrote:
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
No, but I'm curious. Do you mean to run in on a PDP-11 or would you use
it to cross compile stuff?.
/P
Does anyone here use gcc for the pdp11?
I've been doing some work on it to clean it up. For one thing, it now builds, which certainly is a useful start... :-)
I've been playing with the idea of writing an 82586 driver (UGH!) for the Pro for RSTS, and seeing how disgustingly sick that chip is, doing it from scratch, or even seriously transforming existing assembly language drivers, is an unpleasant notion. On the other hand, doing it in C (more precisely, borrowing from, say, the NetBSD driver, changed as needed) seems more palatable.
I *think* gcc is close to being able to handle that job. So I'll probably be using it for that purpose. Am I the only user of that compiler or are there others?
paul
On 22/10/10 13:31, Johnny Billquist wrote:
On 10/22/10 14:20, Mark Wickens wrote:
Greetings
Following the hard disk tragedy earlier this month BUBBLE has risen
again like a Phoenix from the flames, and as a consequence the website
is now back up and, apart from the WALL, working much is it did pre-crash.
There is now a robust backup schedule in place to make sure this
situation never arises again.
I was thinking about Sampsa's phone directory program again - is there a
way to implement this so that it doesn't cause network issues?
Do it from VMS? :-)
It is only the Linux DECnet that causes my (and others?) logs to fill with data about not reached nodes.
Johnny
Ah OK
I couldn't remember the exact problem, but that now has jogged my memory.
VAX/VMS is the obvious choice for me ;)
Thanks, Mark.
On 10/22/10 14:20, Mark Wickens wrote:
Greetings
Following the hard disk tragedy earlier this month BUBBLE has risen
again like a Phoenix from the flames, and as a consequence the website
is now back up and, apart from the WALL, working much is it did pre-crash.
There is now a robust backup schedule in place to make sure this
situation never arises again.
I was thinking about Sampsa's phone directory program again - is there a
way to implement this so that it doesn't cause network issues?
Do it from VMS? :-)
It is only the Linux DECnet that causes my (and others?) logs to fill with data about not reached nodes.
Johnny
