|
|---|
| | 
E Penguin
Posts 46
08 Jul 2017 18:33
| ucLinux doesn't require a hardware mmu. I don't know whether it's worth it for the Amiga though; if you want a cheap Linux box get a pi.
| |
| | 
Vojin Vidanovic
Posts 770
08 Jul 2017 21:05
| Daniel Lakey wrote:
|
ucLinux doesn't require a hardware mmu. I don't know whether it's worth it for the Amiga though; if you want a cheap Linux box get a pi.
|
Thanks, well ucLinux does work on ColdFire and there is a m68k Kernel EXTERNAL LINK It could be Vampire and Amiga adopted. Cheap Linux boxes are all around me, no probs with it on ARM, even PPC32/64 and certainly not on x86/x64 where it is most stable and develop. Apollo is kind of m68k comeback, question is do you find any interest in revamping m68k arhitecture at some point too? It does not have to be "our job" it could be added bonus to standalone/ASICs by e.g. donating boards to Debian team and asking to further recompile to m68k. Not an Atari/Amigan must, but in lack of serious productivity apps, on PPC MOS/OS4 boxes Linux has come as kind of saviour when it comes to machine daily use. So I like keeping things dual/triple boot :-) And having AmigaOS 3.9-Apollo or AmiKit X as first, AROS m68k as second and Linux m68k as third in choices, one day, would be great with no one to loose :-)
| |
| | 
Tango One
Posts 102
08 Jul 2017 21:26
| I think Aos is perfect but one thing that should be added from linux is to be abel to install from shell/cli from a reposotory.
| |
| | 
Thierry Atheist
Posts 644
09 Jul 2017 02:25
| I need a version of linux that: is smaller than ~15 MB
boots up in under 10 seconds
uses no more than 10 megs of RAM
has NO password request (not even a hidden auto entered one)
doesn't use a MMU
doesn't use a swap file
has a RAM disk
has a RAD disk Hmmmm, that's what I have AOS for!!!!!!
| |
| | 
Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 6222
09 Jul 2017 06:37
| Vojin Vidanovic wrote:
|
as Linux does require hardware MMU.
|
AS APOLLO HAS.Why are you posting such misleading threads?
| |
| | 
Roman S.
Posts 149
09 Jul 2017 09:25
| Vojin Vidanovic wrote:
| | Is There Any Interest In Linux 68k? |
Probably not much. Personally, I would prefer the effort to be spent on AmigaOS and Amiga games support. Or even Atari TOS...
| |
| | 
Carlos Milán
Posts 95
09 Jul 2017 13:42
| I would love to have Linux/m68k running on the Vampire, but you need either a m68k compatible hardware MMU (which the Apollo Core lacks) or to write a kernel patch so it can use the Apollo Core MMU (I don't think this is gonna happen). Regarding MMU-less Linux, while possible (and already integrated in the mainstream kernel as a compilation option) it is not of much use unless you are going to code specifically for it. Almost no Linux userland will work with MMU-less kernels. I wrote some months ago to the Debian/m68k distribution list telling them about the Apollo Core and the MMU-less kernel, but the answer was quite clear regarding that. Original post: EXTERNAL LINK Answer: EXTERNAL LINK
I you are curious, I have another Amiga 600 with an ACA030 (full 68030 + 32 MB RAM) that is perfectly capable or running even recent Linux kernels such as 3.16 with standard userland: EXTERNAL LINK (of course, the bootup is WAY SLOW)
| |
| | 
Roger Shimada
Posts 30
09 Jul 2017 16:31
| The 68k was absolutely a big factor in the early Unix market. HP had 68k based Unix systems. In time, 68k on Unix was dead. Manufacturers did one of the following: * Got out of a too competitive market
* Went to RISC (HP & Sun; DEC and IBM Unix systems were always RISC)
* Went to Intel 80386 Today anyone wanting a Linux machine can start with a Raspberry Pi for 35 US dollars.
| |
| |
E Penguin
Posts 46
09 Jul 2017 16:50
| Telnet from amiga to the pi. Nobody needs more than a console
| |
| |
Vojin Vidanovic
Posts 770
09 Jul 2017 20:17
| Gunnar von Boehn wrote:
|
Vojin Vidanovic wrote:
|
as Linux does require hardware MMU.
|
AS APOLLO HAS.
Why are you posting such misleading threads?
|
I am really sorry, but in all sysinfo etc. tests current Apollo cores in Vampire show MMU not present, and they are seen as EC versions of 040/060. Also nowhere (in feature list of Apollo etc.) MMU is mentioned as included. I am glad if current and future Apollo designs have MMU. It makes Linux use here, possible.
| |
| |
Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 6222
10 Jul 2017 05:27
| Vojin Vidanovic wrote:
|
I am really sorry, but in all sysinfo etc. tests current Apollo cores in Vampire show MMU not present, and they are seen as EC versions of 040/060.
|
This is easy to understand.
SYSINFO was developed before the 68080 CPU - so how can SYSINFO correctedly identify it?
Also one has to know that the 68080 MMU is much more capable than all MMUs before.
Apollo 68080 MMU does support new protection mode, e.g. protection from execution - which helps to kill of viruses.
Also Apollo 68080 has 2 memory controllers, this means 2 CPU buses
not just 1 like all previous 68K. This means of course the MMU has technically to support new and different features.
| |
| |
Vojin Vidanovic
Posts 770
10 Jul 2017 13:21
| Gunnar von Boehn wrote:
|
Also one has to know that the 68080 MMU is much more capable than all MMUs before.
Apollo 68080 MMU does support new protection mode, e.g. protection from execution - which helps to kill of viruses.
Also Apollo 68080 has 2 memory controllers, this means 2 CPU buses not just 1 like all previous 68K. This means of course the MMU has technically to support new and different features. |
Nice. Apollo Wiki and Apollo feature list here, should be updated with this info.
I assume, it means, in theory:
a) It could run current m68k Linux kernels. In future some kernel could be m68k recompiled (Linux side)
b) Some updated MMU support in AOS/AROS 68k is needed.
Great news also!
| |
| | 
Markus B
Posts 209
10 Jul 2017 18:05
| Thanks for clarification.
Is the MMU fully integrated into the Vampire FPGA?
| |
| | 
Szyk Cech
Posts 191
10 Jul 2017 19:16
| Markus B wrote:
|
Is the MMU fully integrated into the Vampire FPGA?
|
This question is a perfect way to make BigGun annoy and angry...
Keep going. Ban approaching...
| |
| |
Gunnar von Boehn
(Apollo Team Member)
Posts 6222
10 Jul 2017 19:47
| Vojin Vidanovic wrote:
|
I assume, it means, in theory:
a) It could run current m68k Linux kernels.
|
As long they not use the MMU yes. As you 68080 is different to all previous 68K CPU.
As the 68080 has 2 memory buses - no other 68k did had this.
| |
| | 
Roger Andre Lassen
Posts 150
10 Jul 2017 20:12
| Nope! I have no interest in Linux.
| |
| |
Vojin Vidanovic
Posts 770
10 Jul 2017 21:18
| Gunnar von Boehn wrote:
|
Vojin Vidanovic wrote:
|
I assume, it means, in theory:
a) It could run current m68k Linux kernels.
|
As long they not use the MMU yes.
As you 68080 is different to all previous 68K CPU.
As the 68080 has 2 memory buses - no other 68k did had this.
|
We are back to chicken and egg. New features are great
- but currently UNsupported, since we are beyond "known to m68k"
There is no such Linux kernel to my knowledge,
only possible port source is 2.6 uCLinux kernel, like ColdFire one
EXTERNAL LINK
So Linux is currently a no-go.
Unless someone does and Apollo patched compile :-)
| |
| |
Markus B
Posts 209
10 Jul 2017 21:53
| Szyk Cech wrote:
|
This question is a perfect way to make BigGun annoy and angry...
Keep going. Ban approaching...
|
No, I don't think so.
It's a valid question to avoid such discussions popping up again and again. Nevertheless, what kind of demand could there be for an MMU?
The only things I know of would be Linux and some virtual memory programs. But with lots of memory on the Vampire, what would it be good for. And running Linux..? I don't think this is major goal for the whole project.
| |
| | 
Aksel Andersen
Posts 120
10 Jul 2017 23:07
| Slightly OT. But what about NetBSD? It is still maintained for amiga 68k.
Their motto is: "Of course it runs netbsd".. ;)
| |
| |
Roman S.
Posts 149
11 Jul 2017 09:33
| Well, the latest NetBSD is 7.1, and it is available for Amiga: EXTERNAL LINK
But it won't work on the Vampire - it lacks compatible MMU.
| |
|
Documentation about the Vampire hardware