Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

On Fri, Apr 15, 2005 at 12:21:53AM +0100, Roy wood wrote:
> I spoke with Derek a short time ago and I gather he is going into 
> hospital for an operation soon. This may be why there is no reply.

I hope it will be fine for him. Well, Derek has made contact with me,
so no problem.

Cheers.
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Roy wood]

In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes
Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
Hi 68k folks,
One week ago, I posted a message to sales at q40.de, but got no anwser
then. I also tried webmaster at q40.de, but got no anwser too.
Derek Stewart of D&D Systems is just back from a trip, I guess he'll check
the "sales" account soon.
I spoke with Derek a short time ago and I gather he is going into 
hospital for an operation soon. This may be why there is no reply.
--
Roy Wood
Q Branch. 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex.BN41 2LB
Tel: +44 (0) 1273 386030fax: +44 (0) 1273 430501  skype : royqbranch
web : www.qbranch.demon.co.uk

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 03:39:06PM +0200, Marcel Kilgus wrote:
> Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
> > By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
> > which is required by Linux.
> 
> Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. Using decent JIT technology a 68k
> core (without MMU) with at least 200Mhz (relative to 68060) could be
> possible on current PCs (my guess is more like 300 to 400Mhz). I
> cannot believe that an MMU emulation would slow that down to 1/10th.
> Frankly, I just don't see any market for it, otherwise I would have
> tried.

Maybe I have incorrectly express myself. :)

I should have said "there is no software yet" rather than "there is
no way".

JIT is a nice idea, but for an MMU emulation, even with JIT, it is
just too much ressources consuming, really to much. By the way, I took
the example of ARAnyM which emulates more than a single processor,
but a graphic card, system buses, and some other peripherals. Hence,
my remark was misplaced. ;)

Cheers.
-- 
((__,-"""-,__))  Aurélien GÉRÔME   .---.
 `--)~   ~(--`   Free Software Developer  / \
.-'(   )`-.  Unix Sys & Net Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]@./
`~~`@)   (@`~~`   /`\_/`\
| |.''`. //  _  \\
| |   : :'  :   | \ )|_
(8___8)   `. `'`   /`\_`>  <_/ \
 `---`  `- \__/'---'\__/
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 10:01:02 -0400, Marcel Kilgus  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Phoebus R. Dokos wrote:
Yes but that would be beyond the scope of QPC (to run Linux) anyway;
Of course. Who would want to do that if native Linux is better
supported and magnitudes faster?
There are reasons like learning the architecture or testing executables in  
an emulated environment. After all for most applications where a 68K  
architecture is involved, development takes place in another system.

The JIT idea itself I've toyed with often, but I guess most people are
already happy with the speed as it is. QemuFast is a remarkable
achievement in this respect.
Absolutely, however the tradeoff with specifically QemuFast is reduced  
compatibility (unless steps are taken to trap the problems)

Ffibys
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

[ql-users] Q60 / 80

[pgraf]

Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:

> I am so delighted to hear that. Right, m68k hardware is not yet
> dead! ;D

I'd say it's dead and alive at the same time :-) Commercially it's dead,
because building the mainboards just means risk, work and turnover without
reward. But as your own example shows, some still want highend 68k and are
even willing to spend more money than for hot new PC stuff.

[Snip]

> 1/ Learn the architecture.

This was a point I previously didn't see for native hardware.

> There are some new extensions boards for Falcon with a 68060 at 105 MHz

I wonder what running at about 100 MHz means for the makers of these
boards. Is it just to get a simple 68000 OS like TOS or QDOS working in
the first place, or still correct behaviour in a demanding situation like
building a cross-compiler or a Linux kernel while the system is pageing.
This makes a big difference in my experience.

> 2/ Learn Linux kernel inner-working for the m68k port flavours, and
> Linux kernel generic behaviour. Well, the 68LC060 is well supported
> by the kernel, and I have been told FPU emulation runs smoothly. ;)

Maybe contact Richard Zidlicky about this. He was somewhat reluctant about
the FPU emulation under Linux, although I don't remember exactly why. The
ql-developers list would be the place to discuss this.

> By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
> which is required by Linux.

This was news to me. Thanks for the info and for the explanation of your
68k motivation.

Peter

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Marcel Kilgus]

Phoebus R. Dokos wrote:
> Yes but that would be beyond the scope of QPC (to run Linux) anyway;

Of course. Who would want to do that if native Linux is better
supported and magnitudes faster?

The JIT idea itself I've toyed with often, but I guess most people are
already happy with the speed as it is. QemuFast is a remarkable
achievement in this respect.

Marcel

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Phoebus R. Dokos (Φοίβος Ρ. Ντόκος)]

On Thu, 14 Apr 2005 09:39:06 -0400, Marcel Kilgus  
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

Aurιlien GΙRΤME wrote:
By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
which is required by Linux.
Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. Using decent JIT technology a 68k
core (without MMU) with at least 200Mhz (relative to 68060) could be
possible on current PCs (my guess is more like 300 to 400Mhz). I
cannot believe that an MMU emulation would slow that down to 1/10th.
Frankly, I just don't see any market for it, otherwise I would have
tried.
Yes but that would be beyond the scope of QPC (to run Linux) anyway; plus  
SMSQ/e doesn't require it.

Ffibys
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Marcel Kilgus]

Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:
> By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast emulation of an MMU
> which is required by Linux.

Actually, I wouldn't be so sure. Using decent JIT technology a 68k
core (without MMU) with at least 200Mhz (relative to 68060) could be
possible on current PCs (my guess is more like 300 to 400Mhz). I
cannot believe that an MMU emulation would slow that down to 1/10th.
Frankly, I just don't see any market for it, otherwise I would have
tried.

Marcel

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Dilwyn Jones]

Peter Graf wrote:
> When folks invest so much money there still must be more in a native QL
> system that just the capabilty to execute a QL OS. What is this today?
> 
> Is it the simplicity of the system? Power consumption issues / fanless CPU
> operation? Direct access to the hardware without emulated software layers?
> The fast boot into the 68k OS after power-on? The option to do totally
> without Windows or Linux? Intel outside? Nostalgia? Tinkering and
> learning? A little bit of all of them? Something else?
> 
> Peter
I think a combination of all these things.

I am content with QPC2 and a PC, but would probably buy a Q60 if I had the 
money and the space in the house.

For me, it is the ability to use a different type of computer to that which I 
use every day in work.

In QDOS or SMSQ I can write my own programs and generally "tinker" which I 
would not do on other computer systems.

There is also the general level of friendship of the QL community. We all try 
to help each other. People who stay with the QL generally do so for reasons 
other than profit, so we end up being a very friendly crowd.

Dilwyn Jones

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

> an Atari Falcon, an Apple Quadra 650, or an Amiga 4000T,

Just an erratum : "Apple Quadra 950". ;)
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

Re: [ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

On Thu, Apr 14, 2005 at 12:02:23PM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Derek Stewart of D&D Systems is just back from a trip, I guess he'll check
> the "sales" account soon.

Derek just told me in private my mail did not come through in the
first place, so I simply mailed him again to its own email address.

> It touches me to see that folks still want native highend 68k systems
> although we are nowhere able to compete with the price of a PC based
> emulator. We are not even advertising in the magazines anymore but orders
> keep coming.

I am so delighted to hear that. Right, m68k hardware is not yet
dead! ;D

> When folks invest so much money there still must be more in a native QL
> system that just the capabilty to execute a QL OS. What is this today?

Of course, it is. ;)

> Is it the simplicity of the system? Power consumption issues / fanless CPU
> operation? Direct access to the hardware without emulated software layers?
> The fast boot into the 68k OS after power-on? The option to do totally
> without Windows or Linux? Intel outside? Nostalgia? Tinkering and
> learning? A little bit of all of them? Something else?

Well, I do not know for the other people. However, in my case, it
could be criticise by QL native system people like you who prefer
using the original system.

Of course, all your hypothesis are also my concern. ;)

I am a Debian GNU/Linux m68k contributor, I need decent hardware to:

1/ Learn the architecture. Of course, I can do that with
an Atari Falcon, an Apple Quadra 650, or an Amiga 4000T,
but that last one is at most a 68060 at 56 MHz. There are
some new extensions boards for Falcon with a 68060 at 105 MHz
, but Linux does
not support them yet. I need to get in touch with people working on
the related kernel part, before getting my money into it. :)

2/ Learn Linux kernel inner-working for the m68k port flavours, and
Linux kernel generic behaviour. Well, the 68LC060 is well supported
by the kernel, and I have been told FPU emulation runs smoothly. ;)

3/ Help the building of Debian packages on m68k
by setting up an auto-builder. The goal is to get
the fastest hardware to have the building done. See
 to
know why.

By the way, there is *NO WAY* yet to get a fast
emulation of an MMU which is required by Linux. See
 and
.

BasiliskII for Mac68k has no MMU support.

ARAnyM for Atari has a huge MMU implementation which consumes a lot,
even when Videl graphics emulation is offline. I was at 15 MHz at most
on a dual Athlon MP 2400+ and 20 MHz at most on a dual G5 at 2 GHz.

UAE for Amiga has an old unstable MMU implementation which does not
work anymore.

Cheers.
-- 
((__,-"""-,__))  Aurélien GÉRÔME   .---.
 `--)~   ~(--`   Free Software Developer  / \
.-'(   )`-.  Unix Sys & Net Admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]@./
`~~`@)   (@`~~`   /`\_/`\
| |.''`. //  _  \\
| |   : :'  :   | \ )|_
(8___8)   `. `'`   /`\_`>  <_/ \
 `---`  `- \__/'---'\__/
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

[ql-users] Q60 / 80

[pgraf]

Aurélien GÉRÔME wrote:

> Hi 68k folks,
>
> One week ago, I posted a message to sales at q40.de, but got no anwser
> then. I also tried webmaster at q40.de, but got no anwser too.

Derek Stewart of D&D Systems is just back from a trip, I guess he'll check
the "sales" account soon.

> Where can I buy a Q60 / 80?

The Q60 is sold from D&D Systems in England.

It touches me to see that folks still want native highend 68k systems
although we are nowhere able to compete with the price of a PC based
emulator. We are not even advertising in the magazines anymore but orders
keep coming.

When folks invest so much money there still must be more in a native QL
system that just the capabilty to execute a QL OS. What is this today?

Is it the simplicity of the system? Power consumption issues / fanless CPU
operation? Direct access to the hardware without emulated software layers?
The fast boot into the 68k OS after power-on? The option to do totally
without Windows or Linux? Intel outside? Nostalgia? Tinkering and
learning? A little bit of all of them? Something else?

Peter

___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm

[ql-users] Q60 / 80

[Aurélien GÉRÔME]

Hi 68k folks,

One week ago, I posted a message to [EMAIL PROTECTED], but got no anwser
then. I also tried [EMAIL PROTECTED], but got no anwser too.

Where can I buy a Q60 / 80?

Cheers.
___
QL-Users Mailing List
http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm