Date: Thu, 11 Dec 1997 00:17:49 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: jamil@acroal.com (J. Weatherbee - Senior Systems Architect) Cc: tlambert@primenet.com, jasone@canonware.com, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: OS Ports Message-ID: <199712110017.RAA29759@usr02.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971210155638.25636B-100000@acroal.com> from "J. Weatherbee - Senior Systems Architect" at Dec 10, 97 04:05:40 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've actually been getting pretty serious about maybye doing a M68300 > emulator, I.E. 68330, 68331, 68332, 68F33, 68334, 68336, 68340, 68341, > 68349, or 68360 emulator. Simply because I have some very good > familiarity with the 68hc11 series. And the 68300's are actually still > being made all of the above for embedded systems (running up to 25Mhz). > This makes it a little more testable. I'm more interested in the standard processors used in Macintosh, Amiga, and HP/Apollo systems, as far as Motorolla goes. The PPC is mildly interesting (it used to be very interesting until Steve Jobs basically murdered Apple out of nostalgia). The MMU/FPU versions of the chips (030/040) are more interesting because BSD requires paged memory management and (to some extent, and for no good reason) an FPU. The reason this is interesting is that there are already BSD's that run on them with which the emulator can attempt to be binary compatible. AFAIK, there's no NetBSD (for example) for the processors you list. Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199712110017.RAA29759>