Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phil Kett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Rich Mellor wrote : However, the main problem is that people are not willing to spend money in order to improve their systems. QPC2 is by far the best emulator available, and has the best support available, but alas, people are looking to get as much as they can for nothing and not recompense the authors for all their hard work. It's not about not wanting to recompense the authors - if I had the money to do so I would gladly hand it over. Some people are in a situation where they don't have spare cash to lay out on hobbies. I have the hardware already and have had for years - just because I spent money on the hardware an age ago doesn't mean that I have money to spend on software now. I would love to be able to just stump up the cash and buy a copy of QPC, buy a copy of QMAC and all the rest of the stuff I need to get going - the money just isn't there though. I suspect that there might be a lot of other people out there that if it was easy to develop for SMSQ or QDOS then they would. The software that is around for the QL is not that expensive. Plus once purchased it has a long lifetime of use, as there are not many competitors around to supersede or tempt with an alternative. I bought QPC over 10 years ago, and most of the upgrades have been free, and easily available now that we have web sites and the internet. The enhancement in functionality during that period has been incredible, and every new version has got quicker in operation. I have also bought both QDT - QL DeskTop - and Launchpad. Even though they do a similar job. Running all of these together with the latest SMSQ/E makes for a smooth environment to work within. What has been lacking recently is new and interesting applications that run on the system. Rich Mellor wrote : I just wish I could find a way of bringing QWord to the PC games market as people are willing to pay for good games, but they would not want to purchase a full QPC2 just to be able to run it. What was Qword written in? Basic? You could try porting it to something like Dark Basic for the PC Though it has to be said that although people in the PC world are willing to pay for good games, there are so many good games out there (especially for Linux) that are free that to pay for something it needs to be exceptionally good! I think that QWord is a mixture of Assembler and compiled BASIC. However, Rich will probably give a reply. If QWord were get to a price point of say £9.99 for a copy on CD-ROM, for sale to PC users. Then sales of 1000 would give £10K. Which is significant. Given the millions of PC users that figure, and much more would be achievable If a cut down, runtime version of QPC / SMSQ/E came with it, then PC users would be oblivious of their machine having been taken over by a QL Emulator. Which would in itself be a neat reversal ... :-) -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 26 Feb 2007, at 16:12, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Assembling the SMSQ/E source on GWASS as well as Qmac does give some future protection. The user would not experience any difference, I assume. Unless using a processor above a 60020 ? GWASS has a switch LOW_EA to prevent it producing 68020+ effective addresses and long branches so that it produces the correct code for SMSQE just as Qmac does. However, the possibility exists of having the better 68020+ code for Q40/60 say. An example is the conversion to floating point. This would be much more easily done using GWASS than using Qmac where you would have to use DC.W instructions to produce the code. George Thanks, that is clear. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
- Original Message - From: Rich Mellor To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Monday, February 26, 2007 6:10 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On Mon, 26 Feb 2007 10:03:19 -, Jan Palenicek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ah, but if Quanta made all this free, what reason would there be for Quanta to exist? It would offer no different benefits to its members than the general public (apart from the magazine). Some authors placed their programs in the Quanta library on the condition that they were only to be available to Quanta members, and so cannot be more widely distributed. Even Quanta can be naughty at times. Some authors, including myself, have put material in the library on the strict condition that only a nominal copying fee can be charged. I, tongue in cheek, threatened to sue Quanta for £15,000, their then capital for charging £10 for a CD that cost about 50p to produce. However, if someone wants to scan in the QDOS Reference Guide (with permission from Tony Tebby of course) and the Jan Jones handbook (with permission from Jan Jones), then feel free. Both Tony Tebby and Jan Jones are around and contactible, therefore feel free to ask for their permission. I doubt you will get it, but you never know. Just in case the Jan Jones debate starts again I understand that she is very reluctant to see further publication of her work. It was only with a great deal of diplomacy and patience that Quanta was able to get her permission for their two reprints. As to motivation - what greater motivation do you need - the QL has a very small user base and you would get the undying thanks of every one of them. The main problem is that even when software does come out, so few copies are actually sold (even at £5 a copy) that both traders and software authors lose interest and the feedback is nil - this is all due to the size of the market which is ever diminishing. Total sales (in order of publication - see how the market has got smaller): Solvit-Plus84 QL-Thesaurus97 Style-Check85 QL-2-PC Transfer53 QL-Rhymes10 Auto-Graph10 Vocabulary Database3 Pindown1 Best Wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
I know I keep harping on about it but take another look at the spectrum, the best emulators for that Fuse (for linux) and Spin (for windows) are both free. Someone can download one of those, then go to the world of spectrum website and download all the applications they need to start developing for it. The same can't be said for the QL. I suspect that's one of the reasons why there are so few people developing software for the QL. Yes but then you have to look closely at World of Spectrum. It is in effect a software archive - many of the programs have never been made public domain, but the people running the website are willing to take the risk that they will not sued. There are also a lot of the Spectrum software authors who are around and have given their permission. Amiga, Atari, CPC, XE, XL, MSX (hope you know what the letters mean) - people decided to put such old software and games on the web and make it available for free. Such software is called abandonware, see wikipedia term: Abandonware is computer software which is no longer being sold or supported by its copyright holder. Alternativeely, the term is also used for software which is still available, but on which further support and development has been deliberately discontinued. Sometimes, it is used as a blanket category for any software over a certain age, usually five years. This has happened also for PSION PDAs, where Psion officially stopped support (in ~2004) and some SW companies agreed to put their products without support on the web for free. The QL has had authors disappearing quickly since the early days, meaning that the majority of development tools are not public domain and without any sources to allow further development. Disappeared author cannot receive money. Such software fits into Abandonware (AW) category and could be made available. Let's face it, Toolkit 2 was always one of the main requirements for good quality programs on the QL, yet how many years was that before it was able to released into the public domain. Where are all the public domain hoardes of people using free tools to develop that further? I can tell you, they are playing with other old computers. E.g. Amiga, ZX... There is much easier way to get what you need. So apart from not being able to compile SMSQ/e without a system running 68020+ instructions, what exactly is stopping all these people writing other software? I am mising more pages like Qdos Internals. HTML version of docs, diagrams, schematics, source code, examples. Quanta has some software and documentation library for members. This should be made available for free. It is probably another terrorist approach in your eyes, but from my outside point of view it is a must. I don't say that YOU need to do it. As Phil suggested, there are good examples at ZX scene where people cooperated and provided results for free. This will happen on QL if people will be interested and motivated to do it. Answer this if you dare: What should motivate newcomers in writing QL software? Why is writting software easier on QL than any other old computer Apple Lisa, Amiga OS, ZX or Atari? If you don't need new people and new projects - keep on current track. QL will slowly phase out as the current memebers will get older and older... Yes but then you have to look closely at World of Spectrum. It is in effect a software archive - many of the programs have never been made public domain, but the people running the website are willing to take the risk that they will not sued. There are also a lot of the Spectrum software authors who are around and have given their permission. There is another major difference. The QL was never a games machine. It was marketed as a business machine and most of the software written for it was applications oriented and not games oriented. True, we had a few games, and some were very good, but we did not have the vast archive of games the Spectrum had. Let's make the QL games archive! At least these few games will be played again (after 10 years of waiting on some microdrive). We also, for the same reason did not have the vast user base either and a lot of the users left the QL when the PC became dominant because applications were faster and better on the PC, Looking at the Spectrum world is misleading and, as Rich points out, no-one there gives two hoots about licences, copyright or that kind of thing. They just want to play with their Jet Set Willy. I am not playing JSW on my ZX. I am programming utilities, demos and meeting friends. It is all about having fun and talking to people who understands my language. Games were definitely my starting point on ZX as for thousands of other people. You should know that games pushed programming forward, because it was necessary for fast routines to be developed. Shame for QL that there were no more games. I hardly believe your interest in computers is coming from making spreadsheets in Abacus.
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 13 Aug 2006, at 09:05, Wolfgang Lenerz wrote: Perhaps understandably, I don't want to go from a state where I have sources that work to a state where I have sources that no longer work, I think this is absolutely essential. I spent a lot of time comparing GWASS results with Qmac results to convince myself that the results were the same. But what I was doing was making sure that a GWASS compiled system was the same as the original Qmac one. The comparison needed with a new SMSQE source code is that between the original Qmac results and the new Qmac results. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 25 Feb 2007, at 17:30, Malcolm Cadman wrote: From this and your earlier comments, am I correct in understanding that GWASS is a more modern Assembler than Qmac ? George Gwilt replied : GWASS has been changed fairly recently and will be changed again if need be. Also GWASS assembles all the instructions in the 68000 series up to the 68060 and this includes the Floating Point instructions. Its macro facility is similar to that of Qmac (apart from the syntax). GWASS can do some things that Qmac can't and vice versa. OK. So , GWASS have some current support, which Qmac has not, I gather. Assembling the SMSQ/E source on GWASS as well as Qmac does give some future protection. The user would not experience any difference, I assume. Unless using a processor above a 60020 ? -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Abandonware is computer software which is no longer being sold or supported by its copyright holder. Alternativeely, the term is also used for software which is still available, but on which further support and development has been deliberately discontinued. Sometimes, it is used as a blanket category for any software over a certain age, usually five years. No this is two different arguments. Most of the QL software was written in the UK and the UK copyright laws do not recognise any such term as abandonware. Nearly all computer game companies were from UK. Now AW. I for one am unwilling to host downloads on my website which may leave me open to legal suits from the original author for infringement of their copyright. Under UK law, copyright lasts life + 50 years, so we have a long way to go. It is certainly a risk, but we won't be there in 50 years. As a software author I also disagree completely with the argument of abandonware - many of the routines I have written in my software remain protected by copyright and have been used in other software on other machines - I would not want to give away the secrets to all and sundry. Indeed some of my code has been coded so as to make the method of circumventing certain problems particularly obscure so that I could easily identify where that code has been utilised elsewhere. I understand this argument and partially agree. I am not telling that source code shall be free. Your software is protected by copyright even if it's free(ware). AW is still protected by copyright law. Frankly speaking there are hardly some software secrets which hasn't been unveiled already. Look at programmers heaven, sourceforge, algorithm archive... etc. There are websites with fully documented sources of anything you can imagine of. You don't need to reinvent the wheel and look into someones programs to get the algorithms. From the other side, if there is no source available, there is no way to stop someone in hacking others software. I think you also pointed that some old programs had to be reverse-engineered to be able to make modifications for new QL HW. How did you faced up that license violation? Certainly I know of a few old QL software companies that would also take this stance particularly bearing in mind the money they paid for development of the software. Well, it'a question. Making a website like world of spectrum (WOS), with company info, images, authors, history, maybe a link to current website. I can imagine that former authors would be interested. to released into the public domain. Where are all the public domain hoardes of people using free tools to develop that further? I can tell you, they are playing with other old computers. E.g. Amiga, ZX... There is much easier way to get what you need. Actually I don't think that the QL users / programmers went on to program the Amiga and Spectrum. Some did move onto the Amiga, but the 68008 has actually created a much stronger breed of programmers than the Z80 - many have moved onto Unix, Linux and realtime programming (controls software, which is mainly 68000 based). Again, I am not comparing Z80 and 68k. I am comparing retro computers. You didn't get my point. If anyone interested in old computers (like someone is interested in old cars) would decide to play with this or that old platform, he would hardly chose QL, because there are strong walls. Now, we can buy Amiga 1200 on eBay for a few bucks and it's fair enough for games and for development as well - there are sites which are hosting everything what was ever written for amiga (or whatever else computer). So, the hoardes of people interested in retro computing and wasting their free time are there - on another platforms. Most probably having more fun than with QL. I don't think you can see this argument if you have everything ever written for QL. Software demonstrates capabilities of the computer. If there is lack of available software, it's hard to be interested what the machine can do. Same for development, QL is complex enough to be called black box without docs. Back to processors, 68k is half-dead CPU. Motorola sold the CPU business to Freescale and as far as I know, native 68k is supported only on the DragonBall (68000). Higher 68k versions are not produced anymore. I am not sure if another chip manufacturer licensed it from Motorola. FYI, Z80 is still living, it is used in embedded applications and it's main business for Zilog even today. I am mising more pages like Qdos Internals. HTML version of docs, diagrams, schematics, source code, examples. Quanta has some software and documentation library for members. This should be made available for free. It is probably another terrorist approach in your eyes, but from my outside point of view it is a must. Ah, but if Quanta made all this free, what reason would there be for Quanta to exist? It would offer no different benefits to its members than
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I'm afraid the problem is far more complicated than just the naming of parameters. The only way GWASS or Qmac could deal with both forms of macro would be by writing a separate parser for each. There would of course have to be a switch somewhere to tell the assembler which macro type to expect. From this and your earlier comments, am I correct in understanding that GWASS is a more modern Assembler than Qmac ? Making GWASS the better way forward in the future. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
George Gwilt wrote : I wonder how many QL machines can run SMSQE but do not have a 68020+? I can only think of gold card. All the other types have one of 68020, 68040 and 68060. So how many people just have Gold cards and want to compile SMSQE? Two, or 200 or 5,000? Let's not forget all the Ataris, too. Just a few more comments on GWASS and the sources: George has already done an enormous amount of work on the sources to find the incompatibilities and address them. Notably, he has re-written all of the macros so that they can be used with GWASS, and belive me, this was much more work than just using some kind of script to change some parameters. The scheme that is intended to be set up here is to have his macros in a separate directory and the user can then copy those that he wants into the macro directory within the sources. Of necessity, the macros need to have the same name. There are other changes that need to be done. I'm in the, admittedly wery slow, process of trying the integrate these changes into the sources. Perhaps understandably, I don't want to go from a state where I have sources that work to a state where I have sources that no longer work, because of a change that was made in one of over a hundered source files and will be very difficult to trace... So it is being done but very slowly (and the reply to the question put here of when it will be done is when I have had enough time to do all of this and am satisfied that some bug introduced in the process won't bite me in a few months...). Wolfgang ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 23 Feb 2007, at 10:53, George Gwilt wrote: The only other way would be to find someone to volunteer to convert the smsq/e sources (which were originally written using QMAC) so that they could be compiled with another assembler. However, GWASL is the only public domain assembler so this would require a lot of work and may be pointless after all - the resultant file sizes may be of such a size that it wouldn't be possible to compile it in the memory provided by a Gold Card anyway !! I can see that it would be nice if GWASL could be upgraded to deal with macros in the way that GWASS does. One of the changes to GWASS to allow assembly of SMSQE source was to translate macro calls written for Qmac to the style needed by GWASS. To transfer all this to GWASL would be a largish task. However, the source code for both assemblers is available so it is open to anyone to have a go. I wonder how many QL machines can run SMSQE but do not have a 68020+? I can only think of gold card. All the other types have one of 68020, 68040 and 68060. So how many people just have Gold cards and want to compile SMSQE? Two, or 200 or 5,000? George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 23 Feb 2007, at 18:44, Daniele Terdina wrote: What would prevent GWASS to be augmented to 'understand' Qmac macros? (In general terms... I'm not familiar with either assembler having only used Metacomco's assembler myself). GWASS macros, like HISOFT assemblers and others (in fact all others that I have seen except Qmac) use \1, \2 etc to signal parameter 1, parameter 2 etc. Qmac uses names on the first line of the macro after the word MACRO. So fiddle_de_dee MACRO par1,par2 would start a Qmac macro. Later you might have inside this macro DC.L par1 GWASS would have fiddle_de_dee MACRO DC.L\1 I will most certainly not myself alter GWASS to define macros in the non standard Qmac form. To alter GWASS would be possible, because almost anything is possible in computing, but I do not think it worth it. After all I have already altered ALL the macros used in SMSQE so that the altered versions can be used instead of the Qmac ones, so there almost nothing to be gained by altering GWASS to read Qmac macros. It would be more to the point for someone to alter Qmac so that it could read the standardish format of GWASS macros. But that would be (a) impossible and (b) lead to a more expensive Qmac I imagine. These are just my opinions and anyone is free to look at the source code of GWASS and make suggestions as to how the change might be made. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
fiddle_de_dee MACRO par1,par2 would start a Qmac macro. Later you might have inside this macro DC.L par1 GWASS would have fiddle_de_dee MACRO DC.L\1 Are you sure this is the _only_ difference? If that's the case, I could easily write a small program (probably a Perl script) to automatically convert all sources from the first to the second format. Daniele ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
I agree with your comment George, however, I wonder how many people might be interested in working on smsq/e if they could easily compile it on a non-68020+ environment. Q-emuLator can run SMSQ/e Gold Card (it does not support 68020+) at least and it could possibly generate sufficient interest to persuade people to look at changing some of the other QL emulators to support SMSQ/e. I also favor a build system that can run on all 68000 systems, including all emulators. Couldn't GWASL be used insteas of GWASS? I doubt SMSQ/E has any 68020+ instructions, except for a few to set the cache registers, but they are coded as DC.W. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 18:46:17 -, George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 24 Feb 2007, at 18:38, Rich Mellor wrote: I agree with your comment George, however, I wonder how many people might be interested in working on smsq/e if they could easily compile it on a non-68020+ environment. Q-emuLator can run SMSQ/e Gold Card (it does not support 68020+) at least and it could possibly generate sufficient interest to persuade people to look at changing some of the other QL emulators to support SMSQ/e. I also favor a build system that can run on all 68000 systems, including all emulators. Couldn't GWASL be used insteas of GWASS? I doubt SMSQ/E has any 68020+ instructions, except for a few to set the cache registers, but they are coded as DC.W. It is not the 68020+ instructions in smsq/e sources that are the problem. Rather it is the fact that GWASL does not support macros. Does the licence prevent A from sending his changes in SMSQE to B who then compiles it and sends the results to B? George Not if he is sending it to himself !! That is the main problem in that unless the person is a reseller (although you do not have to pay or fee or anything, just ask), you cannot distribute the binary of smsq/e. You can however distribute a patch program to patch in your changes. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On Sat, 24 Feb 2007 18:39:31 -, George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 24 Feb 2007, at 15:52, Rich Mellor wrote: On 23 Feb 2007, at 18:44, Daniele Terdina wrote: What would prevent GWASS to be augmented to 'understand' Qmac macros? (In general terms... I'm not familiar with either assembler having only used Metacomco's assembler myself). GWASS macros, like HISOFT assemblers and others (in fact all others that I have seen except Qmac) use \1, \2 etc to signal parameter 1, parameter 2 etc. Qmac uses names on the first line of the macro after the word MACRO. So fiddle_de_dee MACRO par1,par2 would start a Qmac macro. Later you might have inside this macro DC.L par1 GWASS would have fiddle_de_dee MACRO DC.L\1 I will most certainly not myself alter GWASS to define macros in the non standard Qmac form. To alter GWASS would be possible, because almost anything is possible in computing, but I do not think it worth it. After all I have already altered ALL the macros used in SMSQE so that the altered versions can be used instead of the Qmac ones, so there almost nothing to be gained by altering GWASS to read Qmac macros. It would be more to the point for someone to alter Qmac so that it could read the standardish format of GWASS macros. But that would be (a) impossible and (b) lead to a more expensive Qmac I imagine. These are just my opinions and anyone is free to look at the source code of GWASS and make suggestions as to how the change might be made. The problem is that currently, you need two versions of the source files presumably, dependant upon whether GWASS or QMAC is to be used to assemble the sources. I have produced SMSQE source which allows the use of either GWASS macros or Qmac macros by the choice of one of two directories within the source code. One directory contains all the macros in Qmac form and the other all the macros in GWASS form. The rest of the source code remains the same for both GWASS and Qmac. This means that non 68020+ users cannot currently compile the source unless they purchase QMAC (Oh dear it costs £15 for Quanta members - that is such a huge outlay). Yes However, one option would be to write a basic program which could search through the source files and replace the parameters with \1, \2 etc This should not be too difficult to achieve, but it does mean that only one set of sources needs to be maintained and it would be easier to assemble them with other macro assemblers. I have the QMAC manual here - it looks as though you can have: fiddle_de_dee MACRO par1,par2,par3 etc fiddle_de_dee MACRO par1 par2 par3 etc The main problem is if the sources use the alternative method of accessing the parameters, as DC.L par1and DC.L .PARM(1) are both the same. .NPARMS is another function which returns the number of parameters passed, therefore you could presumably create this in a loop to read all of the parameters one by one. Do the sources contain these variants? I'm afraid the problem is far more complicated than just the naming of parameters. The only way GWASS or Qmac could deal with both forms of macro would be by writing a separate parser for each. There would of course have to be a switch somewhere to tell the assembler which macro type to expect. I feared as much - however, as the macros are all within one directory as you say and easy enough to select, this is not really a problem. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 00:18:27 -, Stephen Usher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Well, However, it is not the fault of SMSQ/e that only commercial assemblers can compile it. George Gwilt has done a sterling job with GWASS and converting smsq/e sources (and the compiler in some aspects) to ensure it can be compiled. However, this is limited to a 68020+ processor and there is no other public domain assembler that handles macros (so far as I know). The only other way would be to find someone to volunteer to convert the smsq/e sources (which were originally written using QMAC) so that they could be compiled with another assembler. However, GWASL is the only public domain assembler so this would require a lot of work and may be pointless after all - the resultant file sizes may be of such a size that it wouldn't be possible to compile it in the memory provided by a Gold Card anyway !! Well, what about porting it to the GNU assembler and writing a cross-assembling environment for Linux etc.? Surely the problem here is bootstrapping and it doesn't matter what system you use to bootstrap as long as it's easily available to practically everyone? I'm sure assembling SMSQ/e on a 2GHz Athlon 64 box would be a darn sight faster than any QL derivative. Once you have SMSQ/e compiled and onto a suitable bootable media you can then start copying all the other applications across on the target system, as it's now running the new OS. The idea of using another cross-assembler might be ok, but it shouldn't be limited to one that runs on Linux as unfortunately, Windows users have to be catered for. However, the problem is that in order to do this, you need someone with in depth knowledge of QMAC and the new assembler to be used, and someone who can follow the original smsq/e sources to ensure that they are all converted correctly. Any volunteers?? -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 22 Feb 2007, at 21:48, Rich Mellor wrote: The only other way would be to find someone to volunteer to convert the smsq/e sources (which were originally written using QMAC) so that they could be compiled with another assembler. However, GWASL is the only public domain assembler so this would require a lot of work and may be pointless after all - the resultant file sizes may be of such a size that it wouldn't be possible to compile it in the memory provided by a Gold Card anyway !! I can see that it would be nice if GWASL could be upgraded to deal with macros in the way that GWASS does. One of the changes to GWASS to allow assembly of SMSQE source was to translate macro calls written for Qmac to the style needed by GWASS. To transfer all this to GWASL would be a largish task. However, the source code for both assemblers is available so it is open to anyone to have a go. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 23 Feb 2007, at 08:58, Rich Mellor wrote: However, the problem is that in order to do this, you need someone with in depth knowledge of QMAC and the new assembler to be used, and someone who can follow the original smsq/e sources to ensure that they are all converted correctly. A major problem is that Qmac is VERY non standard with regard to its macros. That is why, probably at least 7 years ago now I started converting Qmac's macros so that that they could be used in GWASS. It seems unlikely to me that a cross assembler will be able to use Qmac;s macros. If not, then the same problem as I had with GWASS will be encountered for any new assembler. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
This certainly looks as if it could be of interest.The issue I see is working out what modifications would be required to allow the output to be generated as (or converted to) the SROFF format used under QDOS/SMSQ for object files. If that was done it would probably be quite trivial to adapt c68 to be able to use this as one of the possible target 68k assemblers (it already understands as68 and the GNU assembler). Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jan Palenicek Sent: 23 February 2007 07:25 To: ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff From: Stephen Usher I'm sure assembling SMSQ/e on a 2GHz Athlon 64 box would be a darn sight faster than any QL derivative. Once you have SMSQ/e compiled and onto a suitable bootable media you can then start copying all the other applications across on the target system, as it's now running the new OS. I am using AS by Alfred Arnold. It is open source multiplatform (windows, dos, linux, epoc...) multiprocessor (mototola, zilog, intel...etc) macroassembler. I am using it quite frequently for Z80 and 68k. AS supports 68k up to 68040. And the best thing is that it runs on Psion PDAs. This assembler might be easily ported to QDOS/SMSQ. It is plain C, compiling under C68 should work. http://john.ccac.rwth-aachen.de:8000/as/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
I have now looked at the documentation for this assembler, and it states there that the assembler is not capable of generating linkable code. This would I fear make it non-viable as an option for assembling SMSQ/E and also for use with v68. A shame that as for a moment it looked exciting. Dave -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jan Palenicek Sent: 23 February 2007 07:25 To: ql-users@lists.q-v-d.com Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff From: Stephen Usher I'm sure assembling SMSQ/e on a 2GHz Athlon 64 box would be a darn sight faster than any QL derivative. Once you have SMSQ/e compiled and onto a suitable bootable media you can then start copying all the other applications across on the target system, as it's now running the new OS. I am using AS by Alfred Arnold. It is open source multiplatform (windows, dos, linux, epoc...) multiprocessor (mototola, zilog, intel...etc) macroassembler. I am using it quite frequently for Z80 and 68k. AS supports 68k up to 68040. And the best thing is that it runs on Psion PDAs. This assembler might be easily ported to QDOS/SMSQ. It is plain C, compiling under C68 should work. http://john.ccac.rwth-aachen.de:8000/as/ ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
I have passed this suggestion to Committee for IMMEDIATE consideration. John G. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, February 23, 2007 7:51 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff In a message dated 23/02/2007 00:58:08 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: QMAC and QLINKER is that we still have to pay royalties on every copy sold to GreenStreet Software (£5.00 + VAT Thanks for that clarification but I have a further question. Has the committee asked the publishers or offered to buy the licence? Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Phil, QDOS Classic is actually teh Amiga QL Emulator, ported over to the Q40/60.by Mark Swift. The QDOS Emulator for he Amiga should of been a good idea, as Amiga hardware is really good. An A1200 with a 68060 add on card would be a nice machine. Since the source code for QDOS4Amiga and SMSQ/E is available, can you not convert SMSQ/E to run on the Amiga. Derek Phil Kett wrote: Derek Stewart wrote: Phil, The Amiga already has a QL Emulator, which is free, but is not SMSQ/E, but QDOS. Derek I know the Amiga already has a QL emulator - in fact it has two - Qdos for amiga and Qdos Classic - neither though support some of the recent additions to SMSQ, and neither as far as I know are actively supported. Phil ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm -- This email has been verified as Virus free Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 21 Feb 2007, at 16:37, Malcolm Cadman wrote: I am looking for some well developed examples to show the features of TurboPTR in practice. The application itself does not have to be very complex, just a vehicle for demonstrating the features. There are several examples included with the TurboPTR files on the SQLUG site. I must admit to using these when I write a new PE program using TurboPTR. One of the examples shows how to move, resize and buttonize a program. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 21 Feb 2007, at 16:37, Malcolm Cadman wrote: I am looking for some well developed examples to show the features of TurboPTR in practice. The application itself does not have to be very complex, just a vehicle for demonstrating the features. There are several examples included with the TurboPTR files on the SQLUG site. I must admit to using these when I write a new PE program using TurboPTR. One of the examples shows how to move, resize and buttonize a program. OK. I will have a look at the weekend, thanks. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
spending money on a semi commercial assembler. The licence for QMAC is owned by Quanta. I recall reading sometime ago a statement that Quanta had not sold a copy in years. So to Quanta the membership here, if my recollection and understanding of the situation is correct, would the membership mind if Quanta made QMAC freeware. To the listening Committee is it possible to do this and if so will you, or do you need a formal written request to the chairman? I can write one if you wish. If it can be made freeware couls it be made downloadable from the SMSQ/E sources pages Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
The etherIDE would be a good project - the main problem would most definitely be the lack of a TCP/IP stack and drivers. Alas Peter Graf knows how to implement this, but cannot see eye to eye on the SMSQ/e licence - perhaps it is a language problem, as I do not see what the actual problem is with the need to include open source code in the operating system. It's possible that stuff like Peter's software may be subject to licensing issues which make it difficult to include them within a commercial project. If Peter feels he could go to such trouble, one way forward would be to supply his QLWIP (I hope that's what it was called) as a module, which could be linked to SMSQ/E for example. That way he couldn't be accused of putting free stuff into commercial programs. I'm not taking sides here as I've never had arguments with either side of this issue, but there has clearly not been complete agreement between Peter and the other parties involved on such issues in relation to SMSQ/E in the past. It really is a shame it's happened and I only wish Peter could find a way around this, as far as I can see the only possible way forward would be to supply it as an add-on rather than as a fully integrated part of the OS. It's also been discussed here that in theory at least Peter could (I daresay he might not want to, though) reassemble the SMSQ/E sources and even become a reseller himself, but the SMSQ/E registrar may prefer to have Peter's work put through the usual channels to end up as a part of SMSQ/E for the benfit of all of us SMSQ/E users, but it does run into the insurmountable licensing issues that if Peter's code is a port of something subject to shall not be resold for profit the situation as it stands is probably impossible. Peter's work on this TCP/IP system is not new, I remember Phoebus mentioning it several times in the past. I think Jon Dent's system has run into problems which may mean it won't progress beyond its current state. At least uqlx and qpc2 users can use TCP/IP - I'm tinkering with some email programming at the moment myself (uqlx and qpc2 only so far, I don't think it'll work on SOQL) - but it would be just great to have a universal system of some sort which all QDOS/smsq users could use, as the lack of net access (i.e. having to use Windows!) is a bit of a bugbear for me. And I hope Peter will deliver the SD/MMC unit he teased us with here. With a probable future lack of floppy disk drives, it will give us one way of transferring stuff between computers at least, as well as just being able to read flash memory cards. We do have RomDisq of course, but that is a QL-only device and only 8MB maximum, so a device to read/write SD or MMC cards would be quite useful! -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Unfortunately, Quanta do not own the licence for QMAC - only a distribution licence. They still have to pay a fixed amount for every copy sold. There is also a hefty manual to go with it, which was expensive to reproduce, but I have recently assisted with this, by scanning it all and converting it to Adobe Acrobat format, although it is still over 3MB in size. Unfortunately, Quanta have been unable to get the original licence holder's permission to make it public domain. However, it is not the fault of SMSQ/e that only commercial assemblers can compile it. George Gwilt has done a sterling job with GWASS and converting smsq/e sources (and the compiler in some aspects) to ensure it can be compiled. However, this is limited to a 68020+ processor and there is no other public domain assembler that handles macros (so far as I know). The only other way would be to find someone to volunteer to convert the smsq/e sources (which were originally written using QMAC) so that they could be compiled with another assembler. However, GWASL is the only public domain assembler so this would require a lot of work and may be pointless after all - the resultant file sizes may be of such a size that it wouldn't be possible to compile it in the memory provided by a Gold Card anyway !! The other issue is the DEV_ device. That is NOT limited to smsq/e but is available separately - I can see it on http://www.dilwyn.uk6.net/tk/index.html (hmm who's site is that I wonder?) Rich On Thu, 22 Feb 2007 18:50:20 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: spending money on a semi commercial assembler. The licence for QMAC is owned by Quanta. I recall reading sometime ago a statement that Quanta had not sold a copy in years. So to Quanta the membership here, if my recollection and understanding of the situation is correct, would the membership mind if Quanta made QMAC freeware. To the listening Committee is it possible to do this and if so will you, or do you need a formal written request to the chairman? I can write one if you wish. If it can be made freeware couls it be made downloadable from the SMSQ/E sources pages Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
The other issue is the DEV_ device. That is NOT limited to smsq/e but is available separately - I can see it on http://www.dilwyn.uk6.net/tk/index.html (hmm who's site is that I wonder?) Rich There's a picture of the said person at the bottom of the Rogues Gallery page if you need reminding, Rich ;-) Caption as a clue: (Former) editor emerges to get his teeth into more QL matters ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Thanks to people on this list I'm now in possession of all I need to build SMSQ, I decided to have a go while I was at work. I then realised that I didn't have a copy of SMSQ available to me there (I do at home) and therefore because the source relies on the DEV device being available (which as far as I can see is only available in SMSQ itself) I once again hit a brick wall. There is a such a thing as DEV_REXT which is a small extensions file to give a DEV device on systems which haven't one build in. I've put a copy onto my website at: http://www.dilwyn.uk6.net/tk/index.html The zip file includes a text file plus an article about use of DEV. There's a boot program and the extensions file itself. I've never actually used DEV_REXT myself, I just thought it might prove helpful. The other device utilities like SUB and PTH are there too. Maybe something on the free GPL licence that is stopping Peter from thinking he can distribute his work is beyond me. After all, Red Hat Linux I think that the basic problems are insurmountable here - Peter and the traders have diametrically opposite views on the SMSQ/E situation and I don't think it's going to change, unfortunately. There have been some disagreements in the past which may prevent resolution of this issue - Roy's email shows this. -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Well, However, it is not the fault of SMSQ/e that only commercial assemblers can compile it. George Gwilt has done a sterling job with GWASS and converting smsq/e sources (and the compiler in some aspects) to ensure it can be compiled. However, this is limited to a 68020+ processor and there is no other public domain assembler that handles macros (so far as I know). The only other way would be to find someone to volunteer to convert the smsq/e sources (which were originally written using QMAC) so that they could be compiled with another assembler. However, GWASL is the only public domain assembler so this would require a lot of work and may be pointless after all - the resultant file sizes may be of such a size that it wouldn't be possible to compile it in the memory provided by a Gold Card anyway !! Well, what about porting it to the GNU assembler and writing a cross-assembling environment for Linux etc.? Surely the problem here is bootstrapping and it doesn't matter what system you use to bootstrap as long as it's easily available to practically everyone? I'm sure assembling SMSQ/e on a 2GHz Athlon 64 box would be a darn sight faster than any QL derivative. Once you have SMSQ/e compiled and onto a suitable bootable media you can then start copying all the other applications across on the target system, as it's now running the new OS. Steve -- --- Nostalgia isn't as good as it used to be. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
The current situation regarding QMAC and QLINKER is that we still have to pay royalties on every copy sold to GreenStreet Software (£5.00 + VAT). The Manual, due to the small quantities involved is rather expensive to print. The last order we placed came out at almost £10.00 per copy (160 pages) but Rich Mellor recently offered to convert it into an electronic file which could be reprinted or used in its electronic format by the users. We are still selling QMAC and QLINKER complete with manual (printed) for £15.00 plus P Pkg.. As this is the only item on which we still pay royalties, one can tell how many copies we are selling by looking at our Audited Accounts which show an item for Royalties. The foregoing means that we do not have the right to offer free downloads as requested below. I have already asked GreenStreet Software about this and got a strong negative answer. Sorry. Regards, John Gilpin. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Thursday, February 22, 2007 6:50 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff spending money on a semi commercial assembler. The licence for QMAC is owned by Quanta. I recall reading sometime ago a statement that Quanta had not sold a copy in years. So to Quanta the membership here, if my recollection and understanding of the situation is correct, would the membership mind if Quanta made QMAC freeware. To the listening Committee is it possible to do this and if so will you, or do you need a formal written request to the chairman? I can write one if you wish. If it can be made freeware couls it be made downloadable from the SMSQ/E sources pages Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Morning all, True, many articles in QL Today which demonstrate programming techniques etc. are scattered throughout it's 11 volumes. I believe that all of these still exist in electronic form so maybe there is some possible mileage in gathering all of the articles of each series together and either printing them off as a single volume or putting them on a CD as PDF files. I have no idea how much work this would be but it would be work so there would have to be a charge. Nevertheless it would be worthwhile if it got some people writing software again. well, having converted almost all of my Assembly Language tutorials - some of then accurate - to DocBook XML, converted that to pdf and HTML, I can honestly say that it is a fair bit of work going from text to xml. However, the recent QL Toady CD with the docs etc on it had copies of my series plus my conversion of an (Amiga based?) MC68000 processor instructions. If anyone wany a copy of same (in zipped format) please contact me at Norman (at) Dunbar (hyphen) IT (dot) co (dot) uk with a self addressed email (!) and I'll attempt to send a copy back in return. *** If that's ok with the editors of QL Today of course. *** Having said that, any work I produce for the QL and derivatives whether programming or documentation is free and can be used and abused by anyone. It is also entirely possible that Dilwyn has the above mentioned docs on hiw web site. I must check !! Cheers, Norman. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
PS. With regards to how much work it is to convert an article to pdf, for example, see my write up in a recent QL Today. Copies available from me too. Cheers, Norman. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 20 Feb 2007, at 20:15, Rich Mellor wrote: On another note - having mentioned that I'd be willing to try and port SMSQ to the Amiga I decided to download the source today and have a look at it. Thinking that it'd be a good idea to build it for the existing hardware first so that I can experiment. I then find that without yet again spending money I can't do this - I either need to buy QMAC or I need to use GWASS (not that there is any available information on how to do it with GWASS that was another QL Today article that I haven't got) - Unfortunately GWASS requires a 68020 or better which I don't have. Yet again - someone who's interested in doing some good for the QL hits a brick wall. I do not know if GWASL can be used to assemble the sources - George? I am afraid that GWASL would not be able to assemble the source code of SMSQE in the form I use and which I hope Wolfgang Lenerz will soon put on the official site. This altered source code requires the macro facilities in GWASS which are just not there in GWASL. There are many other places where GWASL is just not strong enough. Now that QPC2 is a 28020+ you can use GWASS on that. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 20 Feb 2007, at 20:08, Dilwyn Jones wrote: There's been several TurboPTR articles mostly by George Gwilt - I wonder if George has copies he could send? I'll try and find these, But they will may not be a simple guide to operating the system. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 20 Feb 2007, at 22:14, Malcolm Cadman wrote: I may be wrong, yet I thought that GWASS was optimised for the 68020 for the new hardware, like Q60, and yet still backwards compatible. GWASS should certainly assemble any program suitable for GWASL. In that sense it is certainly backward compatible. GWASL is a copy of GWASS at an early stage in GWASS' s development. Later a few changes were made to GWASL to add a feature or two and to correct mistakes already corrected in later versions of GWASS. Nevertheless even with this this slight divergence you can use GWASS in place of GWASL, but not vice versa. George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In a message dated 19/02/2007 08:20:15 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ah - I do have an email here from Nasta about the Ultra Gold Card project: It is a pity that these projects especially GoldFire have stalled. When exactly did you have the email from Nasta. Is his present situation the same? Is there anything this list can do. I could help with a business case but know nothing about programming hardware. He seems to indicate that the EtherIDE. It incorporates some of the features of the Qubide II as well as the ethernet network hardware from the GF is almost there but only needs funds for the PCB. If this is the case I am willing to help write the business case a suggested by the Quanta Treasurer. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
The email from Nasta was dated December 2006. The etherIDE would be a good project - the main problem would most definitely be the lack of a TCP/IP stack and drivers. Alas Peter Graf knows how to implement this, but cannot see eye to eye on the SMSQ/e licence - perhaps it is a language problem, as I do not see what the actual problem is with the need to include open source code in the operating system. The only charges now made for smsq/e are equivalent in many ways to the charges made for copies of Linux and limitations on the distribution of that, yet I do not see arguments over the various Linux distributions available. Maybe something on the free GPL licence that is stopping Peter from thinking he can distribute his work is beyond me. After all, Red Hat Linux is not free, does not come complete with sources and tools to let you compile it, yet people are happy to write free software under the GPL licence for it and new items, which can be incorporated into Red Hat. Yes I understand that the distributors charge for support - but come on, does the end user see any real difference between paying £x00 for Red Hat Linux, and paying £x0 for smsq/e? Both have readily available sources which can be downloaded and compiled, IF you have the right tools. Oh well, we have all been down this path before and it is a dead end that leads to arguments over the differences in the licence and whether someone can work under one licence or another. Peter wants a free o/s - is there actually anything to stop him from taking the existing sources of smsq/e, repackaging them, rewriting them and selling them or giving them away as compiled binaries called Graf/e ? Not that I see, just so long as he does not want them to be part of the official smsq/e package. Oh well best take cover before I upset the whole community all over again. I do not understand all the arguments and don't have time or the inclination to research the problem / solution especially as it is not going to help my position as a trader. Rich On Wed, 21 Feb 2007 18:38:47 -, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In a message dated 19/02/2007 08:20:15 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Ah - I do have an email here from Nasta about the Ultra Gold Card project: It is a pity that these projects especially GoldFire have stalled. When exactly did you have the email from Nasta. Is his present situation the same? Is there anything this list can do. I could help with a business case but know nothing about programming hardware. He seems to indicate that the EtherIDE. It incorporates some of the features of the Qubide II as well as the ethernet network hardware from the GF is almost there but only needs funds for the PCB. If this is the case I am willing to help write the business case a suggested by the Quanta Treasurer. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Rich Mellor wrote: The email from Nasta was dated December 2006. The etherIDE would be a good project - the main problem would most definitely be the lack of a TCP/IP stack and drivers. Alas Peter Graf knows how to implement this, but cannot see eye to eye on the SMSQ/e licence - perhaps it is a language problem, as I do not see what the actual problem is with the need to include open source code in the operating system. I think the problem here is that no one can build or use SMSQ without actually buying a license to do so. Yes the source is available to download but unless you're already running SMSQ it's not actually possible to compile it. Thanks to people on this list I'm now in possession of all I need to build SMSQ, I decided to have a go while I was at work. I then realised that I didn't have a copy of SMSQ available to me there (I do at home) and therefore because the source relies on the DEV device being available (which as far as I can see is only available in SMSQ itself) I once again hit a brick wall. Open source software generally is useable on open source software without any commercial pre requisites. The only charges now made for smsq/e are equivalent in many ways to the charges made for copies of Linux and limitations on the distribution of that, yet I do not see arguments over the various Linux distributions available. The difference here is that there are also binary copies of virtually all linux distributions available for free download. Maybe something on the free GPL licence that is stopping Peter from thinking he can distribute his work is beyond me. After all, Red Hat Linux is not free, does not come complete with sources and tools to let you compile it, yet people are happy to write free software under the GPL licence for it and new items, which can be incorporated into Red Hat. Yes I understand that the distributors charge for support - but come on, does the end user see any real difference between paying £x00 for Red Hat Linux, and paying £x0 for smsq/e? Both have readily available sources which can be downloaded and compiled, IF you have the right tools. Yes, there is a charge for Redhat (but only the Enterprise version these days) but that mostly covers a 24x7 support arrangement. The source is available for all Redhat packages - it's in fact included in the distribution. Yes, there is a huge difference between SMSQ and Linux, as I've discovered I can't compile the sources for SMSQ without spending money on a semi commercial assembler. If I wanted to I could download a new kernel for my linux machine at any time, compile it with a freely available copy of GCC - compiled by myself from source - and then install that kernel on any machine I wanted to - completely legally and without restriction. I think the major difference is that software for Linux can be developed and compiled on any distribuition of Linux, it is then compatible with all distros assuming GCC versions are comparable. Incidentally, Redhat does come with GCC and all the tools necessary to completely recompile every single piece of software that's included in the binary distribution. I'm not sure that there is a direct conflict between the SMSQ license and GPL, except for the fact that the GPL does include the provision for binary distributions as long as source is included. Whether there is anything stopping someone from branching the SMSQ source I don't know - the way I read the license is that unless you are an official distributor you are not allowed to distribute binaries, and the published license (in the latest source tree I downloaded a couple of days ago) still states that a fee must be paid to Tony Tebby for every binary given to a new customer. I know that it's been said on this list that this is not now the case but it's still in the license. I am an open source developer with software published under GPL (http://www.remosync.org for anyone that's interested) - the GPL gives people a huge advantage in that anyone can use a piece of code that's published under GPL in their own projects as long as the resulting software is also released under GPL. My own code includes some modified checksum routines that I probably would never have been able to write on my own - these came from the cksum command freely available as source under GPL. I myself would like to see a completely open source, freely compilable operating system for the QL - but I honestly don't see it happening. I'm sure after some of my recent emails that a lot of you are thinking I'm just after everything for nothing - this isn't the case. I have QL hardware that I've had for ages and I'd like to contribute to the continuation of a wonderful machine. Every which way I turn though someone wants money from me that I haven't got at the moment. I know I've mentioned it before but take a look at the Spectrum
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Phil, The Amiga already has a QL Emulator, which is free, but is not SMSQ/E, but QDOS. Derek Phil Kett wrote: Rich Mellor wrote: The email from Nasta was dated December 2006. The etherIDE would be a good project - the main problem would most definitely be the lack of a TCP/IP stack and drivers. Alas Peter Graf knows how to implement this, but cannot see eye to eye on the SMSQ/e licence - perhaps it is a language problem, as I do not see what the actual problem is with the need to include open source code in the operating system. I think the problem here is that no one can build or use SMSQ without actually buying a license to do so. Yes the source is available to download but unless you're already running SMSQ it's not actually possible to compile it. Thanks to people on this list I'm now in possession of all I need to build SMSQ, I decided to have a go while I was at work. I then realised that I didn't have a copy of SMSQ available to me there (I do at home) and therefore because the source relies on the DEV device being available (which as far as I can see is only available in SMSQ itself) I once again hit a brick wall. Open source software generally is useable on open source software without any commercial pre requisites. The only charges now made for smsq/e are equivalent in many ways to the charges made for copies of Linux and limitations on the distribution of that, yet I do not see arguments over the various Linux distributions available. The difference here is that there are also binary copies of virtually all linux distributions available for free download. Maybe something on the free GPL licence that is stopping Peter from thinking he can distribute his work is beyond me. After all, Red Hat Linux is not free, does not come complete with sources and tools to let you compile it, yet people are happy to write free software under the GPL licence for it and new items, which can be incorporated into Red Hat. Yes I understand that the distributors charge for support - but come on, does the end user see any real difference between paying £x00 for Red Hat Linux, and paying £x0 for smsq/e? Both have readily available sources which can be downloaded and compiled, IF you have the right tools. Yes, there is a charge for Redhat (but only the Enterprise version these days) but that mostly covers a 24x7 support arrangement. The source is available for all Redhat packages - it's in fact included in the distribution. Yes, there is a huge difference between SMSQ and Linux, as I've discovered I can't compile the sources for SMSQ without spending money on a semi commercial assembler. If I wanted to I could download a new kernel for my linux machine at any time, compile it with a freely available copy of GCC - compiled by myself from source - and then install that kernel on any machine I wanted to - completely legally and without restriction. I think the major difference is that software for Linux can be developed and compiled on any distribuition of Linux, it is then compatible with all distros assuming GCC versions are comparable. Incidentally, Redhat does come with GCC and all the tools necessary to completely recompile every single piece of software that's included in the binary distribution. I'm not sure that there is a direct conflict between the SMSQ license and GPL, except for the fact that the GPL does include the provision for binary distributions as long as source is included. Whether there is anything stopping someone from branching the SMSQ source I don't know - the way I read the license is that unless you are an official distributor you are not allowed to distribute binaries, and the published license (in the latest source tree I downloaded a couple of days ago) still states that a fee must be paid to Tony Tebby for every binary given to a new customer. I know that it's been said on this list that this is not now the case but it's still in the license. I am an open source developer with software published under GPL (http://www.remosync.org for anyone that's interested) - the GPL gives people a huge advantage in that anyone can use a piece of code that's published under GPL in their own projects as long as the resulting software is also released under GPL. My own code includes some modified checksum routines that I probably would never have been able to write on my own - these came from the cksum command freely available as source under GPL. I myself would like to see a completely open source, freely compilable operating system for the QL - but I honestly don't see it happening. I'm sure after some of my recent emails that a lot of you are thinking I'm just after everything for nothing - this isn't the case. I have QL hardware that I've had for ages and I'd like to contribute to the
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Black Box Gold Card and floppies is adequate but slow. There is QL implementation for the Amiga called QDOS4Amiga. However it gives a narrow screen. You cannot LRESPR SMSQE because it just seems to hang. If you can solve this problem then the Amiga world could try the latest version of SMSQE. If you can change the screen so it has the same proportions as the QL even better. George Gwilt's Gwass will run on any Amiga with 68020+ processor and this can be downloaded from jms1.supanet.com/SQLUG. George Gwilt also has developed a program that takes all the hastle out assembling SMSQE. You have to download the source from the official site and email George Gwilt at [EMAIL PROTECTED] I have not tried it but I suspect if you have Linux then there is an emulator for the Amiga (UAE?) which gives a wide screen so perhaps running on the QDOS4 Amiga emulation in in the Linux Amiga Emulation will give the correct display! Or you could try UQLX particularly the version that Marcel has corrected. Install as root so that it reads QL disks in the floppy drive. Other wise if you need a better platform Marcels commercial QPC2 is the best answer. C68 will enable you to program in C. No inline and other ehancements but still good. Cptr is the solution for the pointer environment in C Have a look at SLUG site at jms1.supanet.com/SQLUG for an example of Hello World program with Cptr. Cptr is available on the same site. I can send you another article of pointer programming with Cptr if you wish. I can also send you an article on programming for QL windows. I hope there is enough information here to enable you to decide on the route that you wish to go forward. On Monday 19 February 2007 23:22, Phil Kett wrote: This isn't a reply to any specific email that's been sent to the list on this subject more a general comment on my thoughts about the QL 'scene' as it currently stands. My interest in the QL has recently been rekindled. Some years ago I decided that I had the money to invest in a more modern QL system - I couldn't stretch to the likes of a Q40 but did manage to buy a SGC and Aurora. Although my knowledge of the system was extremely rusty I did manage to get it up and running - installed SMSQ and some other software with the intention of developing some software. Unfortuantely, I found it extremely difficult to get information on how to do so without spending a fair amount of money. The pointer environment was (and still is) a complete mystery as far as programming is concerned. I even subscribed to QL Today but found that the articles, though good, either referred to previous articles that I didn't have or assumed a level of knowledge that I didn't know how to gain. The Aurora machine has now been sold on and has a very good new home with Neil Riley. With the recent mention of the lack of available hardware, I considered the possibility of maybe porting SMSQ to the Amiga platform. QDOS Classic is already available for the amiga and works well - though for some reason it will only work on my 68000 machine and not on the faster 68030. My thought was that at least some of the work has already been done by creating the necessary drivers etc for the Amiga hardware - these seem to have been implemented as add on 'roms' for the QDOS environment. Whether something like this would be possible I don't know - I need to download the source for SMSQ and brush up my 680x0 assembly - it seems on the face of it to be feasible though. As for developing programs for the QDOS or SMSQ - where should I start? I still have a black box QL with a gold card, I've managed to resurrect a couple of working DD floppies. I am primarily a C programmer on Unix type systems, getting and installing a working C development environment on a floppy based system probably isn't practical. I don't have available money to invest in hardware or any commercial emulators - a lack of funds was one of the reasons that the Aurora system was sold in the first place. It's also true to be said that any new software development should really be done on a system that can handle the best the QL has to offer, that means a fast CPU and high colour drivers. My black box QL can hardly be said to fall into that category! :-) [Incidentally Neil, if you're reading this, no I don't for one moment regret selling the Aurora to you!] So, the upshot of all this (and sorry for rambling on) is that although I am willing to put some time into developing software for the QL, it seems that I either have to spend a not insubstantial amount of money on either hardware (which isn't necessarily available) or something like QPC. The alternative is to try and port SMSQ to a hardware platform that I already have access to (the Amiga). Although I would love to do this and indeed will have a look to see if I can manage it I suspect that it's a task that is way beyond my capabilities. I think we have to face the fact
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In a message dated 21/02/2007 23:07:03 GMT Standard Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The email from Nasta was dated December 2006. The etherIDE would be a good project - the main problem would most definitely be the lack of a TCP/IP stack and drivers. Alas Peter Graf knows how to implement this You dont mean Alas only Peter Graf knows how to implement this How about this from the web: uIP is an implementation of the TCP/IP protocol stack intended for small 8-bit and 16-bit microcontrollers. It provides the necessary protocols for Internet communication, with a very small code footprint and RAM requirements - the uIP _code size_ (http://www.sics.se/~adam/uip/size.html) is on the order of a few kilobytes and _RAM usage_ (http://www.sics.se/~adam/uip/size.html) is on the order of a few hundred bytes. uIP is open source software written in the C programming language and the _documentation_ (http://www.sics.se/~adam/uip/documentation.html) and _source code_ (http://www.sics.se/~adam/uip/download.html) is free to use and distribute for both commercial and non-commercial use as long as proper credit is given (the full BSD-style license is _here_ (http://www.sics.se/~adam/uip/license.html) ). It has been ported a wide range of 8-bit microcontrollers and is used in a large number of embedded products and projects (see the _Links page_ (http://www.sics.se/~adam/uip/links.html) for a few examples). As I see it we should try to progress one step at a time. First can the etherIDE oroject be built? You could find the answer to that. Second if it still can be built how much interest is there in aquiring a board and is there a trader interested in selling, again you perhaps.Third can uIP be ported or can Jon Dent's TCP/IP stack be ported across. His development is stalled but has functionalility. I have used it around Christmas time. The problem I experienced is that it does not connect stably to just any IP service provider and specifically with the ones I use at the moment but it may well be fine with bespoke hardware.. Jon is approachable and this might stimulate further development. Duncan ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Well I have time to do this. But I need to learn Turbo and TurboPTR. I'm also very interesting to do this work as I need to use Turbo in few days. Anyone want to give me an help by email explaining me how to start and then we will co-sign the article ? Jimmy. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de George Gwilt Envoyé : mardi 20 février 2007 11:32 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Hi Phil and All I'm on the QL scene for a few months only, and for now I have only two black-box QLs but, untill I'll get some SGC, I think there is a field for software directed to the owners of naked QLs (and I'm ready to spare some of my free time for QL programming). I'm working with C language for over 15 years and the most exciting things I've done was for systems like Amstrad's CP/M machines,C64, ZX Spectrum and Atari 800XL, where you had to fight for every byte of addresable userspace. Today, I'm most excited with programming for embedded systems (unfortunately, since I'm developing in C++ and Java for live, these are rare situations). Now, I think people are looking for a megabytes of RAM and hundreds of megabytes of disk space, whereas what QL offers is enough for a day-by-day usage (i'm not talking about running enterprise using QLs and their network :-)) Just my 2 cents (or pennies)... Sergiusz ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
I'm just start writing this article. So if someone want to make any comments, don't hesitate to send me an email. Jimmy. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de QL2K Envoyé : mardi 20 février 2007 13:37 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff Well I have time to do this. But I need to learn Turbo and TurboPTR. I'm also very interesting to do this work as I need to use Turbo in few days. Anyone want to give me an help by email explaining me how to start and then we will co-sign the article ? Jimmy. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de George Gwilt Envoyé : mardi 20 février 2007 11:32 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phil Kett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I think we have to face the fact that the QL is a dying breed - we're not going to get any new hardware due to costs, and new software is only going to be developed by those already developing software. Partly because of the cost of getting a 'modern' QL system and partly because learning how to program such a system seems to be very, very difficult due to a lack of tutorials or available documentation. There are a lot of books on programming the QL in Assembler, BASIC and C (although not the modern version) and many of these are available, 2nd hand, from QUANTA, TF Services, Rich Mellor etc. These all stop short of the modern system but would provide a grounding in the system. True, many articles in QL Today which demonstrate programming techniques etc. are scattered throughout it's 11 volumes. I believe that all of these still exist in electronic form so maybe there is some possible mileage in gathering all of the articles of each series together and either printing them off as a single volume or putting them on a CD as PDF files. I have no idea how much work this would be but it would be work so there would have to be a charge. Nevertheless it would be worthwhile if it got some people writing software again. -- 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] QL hardware and stuff
Roy wood wrote: There are a lot of books on programming the QL in Assembler, BASIC and C (although not the modern version) and many of these are available, 2nd hand, from QUANTA, TF Services, Rich Mellor etc. These all stop short of the modern system but would provide a grounding in the system. Yes, there are a lot of old books that cover programming the basic QL - I have a lot of them already. The problem is that these cover only the basic QL and the original QDOS system, most don't even cover Minerva. I actually did a lot of assembly coding back in the days when the QL was my main system and I've still got most of my source code - I can probably tinker with that and get back to that level of coding fairly quickly. The problems start though when you try and integrate things like SMSQ or the pointer system, yes documentation is available on the net - and to be honest it's a lot more readily available than it was when I bought the Aurora system from you. Most of it isn't in a coherent state though - by that I mean that it's very bitty and it's difficult to know where one set of instructions might supersede another. True, many articles in QL Today which demonstrate programming techniques etc. are scattered throughout it's 11 volumes. I believe that all of these still exist in electronic form so maybe there is some possible mileage in gathering all of the articles of each series together and either printing them off as a single volume or putting them on a CD as PDF files. I have no idea how much work this would be but it would be work so there would have to be a charge. Nevertheless it would be worthwhile if it got some people writing software again. This is something that I think should be considered, but I think that with the permission of the authors the information should be freely available - yes there's work involved in getting it out there but as a group I'm sure there'd be a few people who'd volunteer to do a few articles and before you know it it's out there and there isn't one single person who's had to put in an inordinate amount of work. To take a leaf from the ZX81/Spectrum community - there was a recent 'project' to scan and OCR the ZX81 rom disassembly, several people chose a range of pages to do - sorted them out and sent them to a central place - they were then collated into a single document - each person involved probably didn't have to spend more than a couple of hours on it but in the end the work was freely available for anyone to use. It also didn't take more than a couple of months to do! On another note - having mentioned that I'd be willing to try and port SMSQ to the Amiga I decided to download the source today and have a look at it. Thinking that it'd be a good idea to build it for the existing hardware first so that I can experiment. I then find that without yet again spending money I can't do this - I either need to buy QMAC or I need to use GWASS (not that there is any available information on how to do it with GWASS that was another QL Today article that I haven't got) - Unfortunately GWASS requires a 68020 or better which I don't have. Yet again - someone who's interested in doing some good for the QL hits a brick wall. Phil ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
- Original Message - From: Roy wood To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 6:07 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phil Kett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I think we have to face the fact that the QL is a dying breed - we're not going to get any new hardware due to costs, and new software is only going to be developed by those already developing software. Partly because of the cost of getting a 'modern' QL system and partly because learning how to program such a system seems to be very, very difficult due to a lack of tutorials or available documentation. snip Roy Wood's reply: True, many articles in QL Today which demonstrate programming techniques etc. are scattered throughout it's 11 volumes. I believe that all of these still exist in electronic form so maybe there is some possible mileage in gathering all of the articles of each series together and either printing them off as a single volume or putting them on a CD as PDF files. I have no idea how much work this would be but it would be work so there would have to be a charge. Nevertheless it would be worthwhile if it got some people writing software again. -- It is also worthwhile getting hold of Dilwyn's Documentation CD. Some old QL Today material is on it and apaer from that it is a useful reference document, Best wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
- Original Message - From: George Gwilt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:32 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? Easier said than done. You could not describe how to use EasyPtr or QPTR in one article. I have had more experience of TurboPTR than most people on this list as I was a, not very good, beta tester. All I can say that George coped with almost every challenge that I threw back at him. But even I would baulk at the idea of writing articles on how to use it. Good to know, however, that someone else is prepared to try. In the meantime I don't think I am giving too too many secrets away by saying that George has just written an interesting article for QL Today over how he adapted the QPTR demo program for compilation with Turbo, Best wishes, Geoff ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
cut On another note - having mentioned that I'd be willing to try and port SMSQ to the Amiga I decided to download the source today and have a look at it. Thinking that it'd be a good idea to build it for the existing hardware first so that I can experiment. I then find that without yet again spending money I can't do this - I either need to buy QMAC or I need to use GWASS (not that there is any available information on how to do it with GWASS that was another QL Today article that I haven't got) - Unfortunately GWASS requires a 68020 or better which I don't have. Yet again - someone who's interested in doing some good for the QL hits a brick wall. I do not know if GWASL can be used to assemble the sources - George? However, if you put a business case to Quanta to ask for a copy of QMAC in support of porting SMSQ/e to the Amiga, I am sure they will be more than willing to listen. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Roy wood wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phil Kett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I think we have to face the fact that the QL is a dying breed - we're not going to get any new hardware due to costs, and new software is only going to be developed by those already developing software. Partly because of the cost of getting a 'modern' QL system and partly because learning how to program such a system seems to be very, very difficult due to a lack of tutorials or available documentation. There are a lot of books on programming the QL in Assembler, BASIC and C (although not the modern version) and many of these are available, 2nd hand, from QUANTA, TF Services, I gave all mine to London Quanta! Rich Mellor etc. These all stop short of the modern system but would provide a grounding in the system. Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF217VM3RzOs8+btoRAvBQAJ9zilb6QqPrWihFXwiITh8l6+zPGQCgg480 ExFjqI8X7KdYjWmtGyedQLY= =Vrhp -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
There was an introduction to Turbo compiler in QL Today Vol 8 issue 6 page 27 (March 2004). Although I was editor at the time, I haven't got a copy of that article. There's been several TurboPTR articles mostly by George Gwilt - I wonder if George has copies he could send? -- Dilwyn Jones - Original Message - From: QL2K [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 12:37 PM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff Well I have time to do this. But I need to learn Turbo and TurboPTR. I'm also very interesting to do this work as I need to use Turbo in few days. Anyone want to give me an help by email explaining me how to start and then we will co-sign the article ? Jimmy. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de George Gwilt Envoyé : mardi 20 février 2007 11:32 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm -- No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.441 / Virus Database: 268.18.1/691 - Release Date: 17/02/2007 17:06 ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Roy Wood wrote: There are a lot of books on programming the QL in Assembler, BASIC and C (although not the modern version) and many of these are available, 2nd hand, from QUANTA, TF Services, Rich Mellor etc. These all stop short of the modern system but would provide a grounding in the system. As far as C programmers are concerned, C68 is the way to go on the QL. There is a wealth of C programming tools if you know where to go and what to look for: 1. There's a whole page on free C stuff on my website 2. CPTR from George Gwilt is one example 3. There are various C libraries available on the PD scene. 4. There's a C library for QMenu from Jonathan Hudson or Christopher Cave (or possibly both of them, I forget which) 5. I think Tony Tebby did a C library for QPTR at some point 6. Easyptr has a C library on disk 3 of the original Easyptr, though I don't think it got updated when Marcel reworked version 4. 7. There's a C Tutorial available in PD, it's on the C page on my website. Just a few quick examples, there's a lot more. True, many articles in QL Today which demonstrate programming techniques etc. are scattered throughout it's 11 volumes. I believe that all of these still exist in electronic form so maybe there is some possible mileage in gathering all of the articles of each series together and either printing them off as a single volume or putting them on a CD as PDF files. I have no idea how much work this would be but it would be work so there would have to be a charge. Nevertheless it would be worthwhile if it got some people writing software again. If there are specific articles, I'll have a look from my backups of material from my editor days which haven't been thrown yet, in case I have copies of anything needed - I'll hold on to them for now. -- Dilwyn Jones ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Roy wood [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Phil Kett [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I think we have to face the fact that the QL is a dying breed - we're not going to get any new hardware due to costs, and new software is only going to be developed by those already developing software. Partly because of the cost of getting a 'modern' QL system and partly because learning how to program such a system seems to be very, very difficult due to a lack of tutorials or available documentation. There are a lot of books on programming the QL in Assembler, BASIC and C (although not the modern version) and many of these are available, 2nd hand, from QUANTA, TF Services, Rich Mellor etc. These all stop short of the modern system but would provide a grounding in the system. Good information is available for programming, with many books. The more recent features like the Pointer Environment and the extended colours are on top of that basis. True, many articles in QL Today which demonstrate programming techniques etc. are scattered throughout it's 11 volumes. I believe that all of these still exist in electronic form so maybe there is some possible mileage in gathering all of the articles of each series together and either printing them off as a single volume or putting them on a CD as PDF files. I have no idea how much work this would be but it would be work so there would have to be a charge. Nevertheless it would be worthwhile if it got some people writing software again. That would be a good idea. Some kind of compilation that brings together programming skills documented for Assembler, BASIC and C. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], QL2K [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes I'm just start writing this article. So if someone want to make any comments, don't hesitate to send me an email. Jimmy. Thanks. I will look forward to reading the article. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de QL2K Envoyé : mardi 20 février 2007 13:37 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff Well I have time to do this. But I need to learn Turbo and TurboPTR. I'm also very interesting to do this work as I need to use Turbo in few days. Anyone want to give me an help by email explaining me how to start and then we will co-sign the article ? Jimmy. -Message d'origine- De : [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] De la part de George Gwilt Envoyé : mardi 20 février 2007 11:32 À : [EMAIL PROTECTED] Objet : Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? George -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], gwicks [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes - Original Message - From: George Gwilt To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2007 10:32 AM Subject: Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff On 19 Feb 2007, at 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. Sounds a good idea. Any volunteers apart from me? Easier said than done. You could not describe how to use EasyPtr or QPTR in one article. I have had more experience of TurboPTR than most people on this list as I was a, not very good, beta tester. All I can say that George coped with almost every challenge that I threw back at him. But even I would baulk at the idea of writing articles on how to use it. It probably will not fit in to just one article alone. However, Roy Wood's idea of pulling all existing information in to one place would be useful. -- Malcolm Cadman ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Message d'origine- De : Malcolm Cadman I'm just start writing this article. Jimmy. Thanks. I will look forward to reading the article. Very good, certainly most because I'm not a native english ;-) Just a quick precision my article will cover only TURBO, as I still haven't any idea what's pointer environnement (PTR,...) is.. Sorry ;-) But I haven't took the time to see what it is exactly... -Message d'origine- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Phil Kett wrote: snip Yes, there are a lot of old books that cover programming the basic QL - I have a lot of them already. The problem is that these cover only the basic QL and the original QDOS system, most don't even cover Minerva. I have just finished the first draft of the OCRed manual (I did not get source from Qview) and myself and Lau are checking. Lau did some great work on Open Office improving some character tables and images. It will soon appear on my website. Tony - -- QBBS (QL fido BBS 2:252/67) +44(0)1442-828255 [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://firshman.co.uk Voice: +44(0)1442-828254 Fax: +44(0)1442-828255 Skype: tonyfirshman TF Services, 29 Longfield Road, TRING, Herts, HP23 4DG -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFF219xM3RzOs8+btoRAr4OAJwL2Xg5TVYvEIZmeOLfRiemPT78eACePurP LmenzwRN5jtX5kxMeyTDN9A= =TFTB -END PGP SIGNATURE- ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
George and I are working on that. There is an example on SQLUG site for writing Hello World in TPTR There was an article in QLToday on how to program XMENU4 in CPTR What are you looking for? On Monday 19 February 2007 19:08, Malcolm Cadman wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], George Gwilt [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On 19 Feb 2007, at 00:50, omega wrote: - Expensive software (Qliberator 50UKP, EasyPtr 41.5UKP, QPTR 30UKP..etc) I hardly dare mention this - but: For Qlib ... Turbo is freely available (and faster!) For EasyPtr and QPTR. TurboPTR is freely available for S*BASIC programs and CPTR for C Can someone write an article for one of the magazines - Quanta or QL Today - around how to use Turbo and TurboPTR ? Beginning from the easy to the expert level of use. I am familiar with some parts of Turbo, because it has always been my compiler of choice. However, I haven't looked in to TurboPTR though ... ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Phil Kett a écrit : On another note - having mentioned that I'd be willing to try and port SMSQ to the Amiga I decided to download the source today and have a look at it. Thinking that it'd be a good idea to build it for the existing hardware first so that I can experiment. I then find that without yet again spending money I can't do this - I either need to buy QMAC or I need to use GWASS (not that there is any available information on how to do it with GWASS that was another QL Today article that I haven't got) - Unfortunately GWASS requires a 68020 or better which I don't have. Yet again - someone who's interested in doing some good for the QL hits a brick wall. Surely the outlay for QMAC can't be that much? Compiling the SMSQ/E sources with GWASS isn't possible - right now, due to the differences between QMAC and GWASS. Moreover, GWASS requires a 68020 so it will not be able to be used on all machines, hence the sources have to stay QMAC compatible, anyway. Still, I'm in the (very slow) process of adapting the sources as much as possible so that they can be used with GWASS. But it's going to be slow, and not for want of George pushing me and offering his help. It's just going to take time because I do not want to move from a stable state to a broken one. On another subject, the lack of documentation on SMSQ/E and the Pointer Environment. The documentation IS there since you can buy it from Jochen, other parts were published, e.g. in QL Today, and are also documented with the sources themselves. So, there again, there is a small financial outlay. As I've understood it from various posts here, that seems to be the rub for many people, who just want everything for free. I'm firmly in the camp of those who believe that the traders have, for a long time, kept our community going, and so I see absolutely nothing wrong with them getting something in return. I find it strange that people, to satisfy their hobby, will gladly buy their hardware, but when it comes to the rest of it, they all expect it to be free. Please do not take this as an individual comment on anyone, it's just a general remark. Wolfgang ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 00:50:36 -, omega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Marcel Kilgus wrote: Thanks, but that's actually not my point. I just wonder why somebody who actually has the knowledge but no prior connection to the QL would want to invest any amount of time in it. For free. Not that I wouldn't be glad if somebody did, just wondering. Good question. First things poped up - challenge, some missing functionality, expensive commercial solution..etc. Now, thinking when you mention no prior connection to the QL - it's even more obvious that pulling someone from outside to start developing new apps / hw for QL without giving him everything he needs is hardly possible. Some of the reasons: - Black QL is useless without expansions - Expansion cards are not being sold, modern QL software requires at least SGC, SMSQ - Expensive software (Qliberator 50UKP, EasyPtr 41.5UKP, QPTR 30UKP..etc) - Lack of documentation or needs to be purchased Well Turbo is a free compiler now which George Gwilt has worked on hard to ensure it can compile Pointer programs - there are tools which mean you don't even need EasyPtr. Several Public Domain sites hold a wealth of tools and even SMSQ/e can be downloaded and compiled from the sources using George Gwilt's own assembler (although I am not certain whether it can be compiled on GWASL - the 68000 version). There is also plenty of low cost second hand software available. I am willing to work with anyone willing to develop new hardware / applications - heck, if someone is looking to program new applications, they could probably twist my arm for some free books, even the SBASIC/SuperBASIC Reference Manual. Now, I don't know why should one start developing for QL. Anybody knows? GC. Regarding QubIDE, I've got the source code and ROM images for anybody interested. It's GPL anyway. The hardware side remains with Nasta, but I'll try to ask him about it. Thanks a lot! Ah - I do have an email here from Nasta about the Ultra Gold Card project: Well, I wish I could give you good news about that project, but I can't. It has basically been mothballed at the same stage it was when last talked about. I have a number of parts ready and a partial design, but at the moment, trying to ressurect it would be VERY difficult financially. not impossible if it was only down to the money, but what makes it so is the complete lack of time. There is, however, a lot of documentation, which couldbe used as a good guide to completing the project. In essence, when last revisited, the GoldFire (that was the project name) spec and documentation was upgraded so that a pair of 68060 CPUs could be used. One was designed as optional, but would have been included in the prototypes, since I have a number of used ones graciously donated by Tony Firshman. These are the 68EC060 version, 66MHz if I recal right. They were to be coupled to a SO-DIMM SDRAM, 256Mb - the type that was used with (now older) laptops. It is still available. This was to be the standard, and also maximum configuration as in the eman time, RAm had become sufficiently cheap. On the IO side, there were the usual floppy and parallel ports (full bidiractional parallel port), but also PC style PS/2 mouse and keyboard connectors, as well as 2 fast serial ports. These were all handled by a single Ultra-IO chip, that also comes from the PC world. Extras were to be a PC style sound chip and a Ethernet 10MB/s network chip. A 2M byte flash ROM was intended to hold the system software (SMSQ/E), which would, of course, be upgradeable. All of this was designed and well documented. The part that was documented but was not fully designed was the singe large logic chip that conencts all of this into a usable single-board computer. The reason why it was not done, was that the manufacturer of the logic chip had been through a merger with another company, and as a result ended up changing all their developement software - requiring from me a seizable additional investment to buy it, along with an even bigger investment in time to learn how to use it (it's a different approach and programming 'l;anguage'). To make it worse, the actual logic chip ended up being scrapped by the new company, though, fortunately, there is still a compatible one available. The logic implemented by the chip is quite complex. It involved not only connecting the SDRAM to the twin 68060 (that was actually the simpler task) but also being a 'bridge' betwen the VERY fast world of the 68060 with the comparatively veruy slow world of the QL bus. In order to provide an open path to further peripheral developement (like an Aurora II and Qubide II), it also incorporated a protocol that could use the existing QL bus signals to transparently implement a fully 32-bit data transfer protocol for newer peripherals, while still providing compatibility with the old peripherals, as well as
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Perhaps QUANTA , Rich, Tony or anyone else for that matter could place a DONATE button on their websites with some form of barometer to show how much we need vs raised etc, a bit like what Blue Peter had back in the 80's when they wanted to save ( town farm / community centre roof / the whale / etc ). A bad idea, I don't think so ! Neil. [EMAIL PROTECTED] 19 February 2007 14:31 My God, this is all to good to be lost for ever. Someone has to take the lead on one or many of these projects or we have to find money to give to Nasta (who, I believe is still the best person to make it work). Also, I offer my help to write the firmware for such a beast. My assembly skills are still quite good. However it would be my first attempt at such a task so help will be welcome! François Le 07-02-19 à 03:17, Rich Mellor a écrit : Ah - I do have an email here from Nasta about the Ultra Gold Card project: Well, I wish I could give you good news about that project, but I can't. It has basically been mothballed at the same stage it was when last talked about. I have a number of parts ready and a partial design, but at the moment, trying to ressurect it would be VERY difficult financially. not impossible if it was only down to the money, but what makes it so is the complete lack of time. There is, however, a lot of documentation, which couldbe used as a good guide to completing the project. In essence, when last revisited, the GoldFire (that was the project name) spec and documentation was upgraded so that a pair of 68060 CPUs could be used. One was designed as optional, but would have been included in the prototypes, since I have a number of used ones graciously donated by Tony Firshman. These are the 68EC060 version, 66MHz if I recal right. They were to be coupled to a SO-DIMM SDRAM, 256Mb - the type that was used with (now older) laptops. It is still available. This was to be the standard, and also maximum configuration as in the eman time, RAm had become sufficiently cheap. On the IO side, there were the usual floppy and parallel ports (full bidiractional parallel port), but also PC style PS/2 mouse and keyboard connectors, as well as 2 fast serial ports. These were all handled by a single Ultra-IO chip, that also comes from the PC world. Extras were to be a PC style sound chip and a Ethernet 10MB/s network chip. A 2M byte flash ROM was intended to hold the system software (SMSQ/E), which would, of course, be upgradeable. All of this was designed and well documented. The part that was documented but was not fully designed was the singe large logic chip that conencts all of this into a usable single-board computer. The reason why it was not done, was that the manufacturer of the logic chip had been through a merger with another company, and as a result ended up changing all their developement software - requiring from me a seizable additional investment to buy it, along with an even bigger investment in time to learn how to use it (it's a different approach and programming 'l;anguage'). To make it worse, the actual logic chip ended up being scrapped by the new company, though, fortunately, there is still a compatible one available. The logic implemented by the chip is quite complex. It involved not only connecting the SDRAM to the twin 68060 (that was actually the simpler task) but also being a 'bridge' betwen the VERY fast world of the 68060 with the comparatively veruy slow world of the QL bus. In order to provide an open path to further peripheral developement (like an Aurora II and Qubide II), it also incorporated a protocol that could use the existing QL bus signals to transparently implement a fully 32-bit data transfer protocol for newer peripherals, while still providing compatibility with the old peripherals, as well as improving their performance. I have done a lot of work on this, the protocols and hardware signals are fully documented, but the logic for the logic chip was not designed fully. Finally, the GoldFire also was to include a small on-board switching power supply with very high efficiency, which made it un-necessary to have an extra heatsink (like GC or SGC) as well as adding anability to work in 9V or 5V powered bus systems without any alteration or hardware setup. In fact, the GF would even be able to supply +-12V at a small current for serial ports external to it, and enable the user to build a low power system running off of 5V only. This was fully designed and even tested as a separate module. However, today it could be made cheaper and smaller with theu se f more modern components. GF was a very ambitious project in a situation where the cash available for it's completion was fast dissapearing. Follow-up projects were also in the works, as the GF opened up a lot of new possibility. The road map included 3 key
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Hi This wasn't by any chance a MACH chip? I still use a PALASM to ABLE conversion program written in SBasic when developing logic for the newer ispLEVER compiler. Malcolm Rich Mellor wrote: The reason why it was not done, was that the manufacturer of the logic chip had been through a merger with another company, and as a result ended up changing all their developement software - requiring from me a seizable additional investment to buy it, along with an even bigger investment in time to learn how to use it (it's a different approach and programming 'l;anguage'). To make it worse, the actual logic chip ended up being scrapped by the new company, though, fortunately, there is still a compatible one available. ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
On 19 Feb 2007, at 00:50, omega wrote: - Expensive software (Qliberator 50UKP, EasyPtr 41.5UKP, QPTR 30UKP..etc) I hardly dare mention this - but: For Qlib ... Turbo is freely available (and faster!) For EasyPtr and QPTR. TurboPTR is freely available for S*BASIC programs and CPTR for C George ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
I send the Qubide source code to Dilwyn for download on his web site. Phil Borman, Ron Dunnett gave permission for the Qubide source to be freely available under the GPL Licence. Derek Marcel Kilgus wrote: Jan Palenicek wrote: Oh well, then we only have to find some of those and we're all good. That should be easy ;-) I didn't say that there are not knowledged people Marcel. You are one of the gurus here and I respect your work and contributions. Thanks, but that's actually not my point. I just wonder why somebody who actually has the knowledge but no prior connection to the QL would want to invest any amount of time in it. For free. Not that I wouldn't be glad if somebody did, just wondering. In other words, I am saying that new people would be more interested in developing QL SW or HW if all the obstacles would disappear. Publishing all available documentation, schematics and source code would make much faster kick off of any new project. QL needs new projects. Well, what exactly would be needed here? The schematics etc. of the GC and SGC boards are unfortunately lost forever, I gather. I am sorry, it is possibly my fault that I am new here and I don't know the people. So, I am the one who want to buid Qubide. Can you give me the direction where can I get the schematics, please? Nasta, the designer, sometimes reads this list. At least he has answered one mail only a month ago ;-) Nasta, are you there? So hardware of that complexity is a pretty old hat. OK, but there are hundred(s) of black-box QL users without such device. But those are probably just happy with what they have and don't intend to expand in any way. At least this is my understanding. Disagree. Maybe you are thinking of your expanded advanced super QL on your desk, but my QL has only sandyQboard. So advancing has different meanings for us. I would be happy with: * Gold Card * Qubide. Fair enough. Unfortunately I don't see any good replacement for the GC. Regarding QubIDE, I've got the source code and ROM images for anybody interested. It's GPL anyway. The hardware side remains with Nasta, but I'll try to ask him about it. It was already pointed that some components in SGC doesn't exist, HW needs to be redesigned, but capable people here doesn't have time. I am proposing to ask general public and transforming this issue into challenge for developers. That might in the best case bring working device in the worst case nothing will happen. As I said, pretty much anything about the GC/SGC design is lost as far as I know. So a redesign is unfortunately not possible, any design would have to be done from scratch. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm -- This email has been verified as Virus free Virus Protection and more available at http://www.plus.net ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Hi Malcolm, I don't know as this was an extract from Nasta's email. Has anyone written to Stuart? Rich On Mon, 19 Feb 2007 15:48:14 -, Malcolm Lear [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi This wasn't by any chance a MACH chip? I still use a PALASM to ABLE conversion program written in SBasic when developing logic for the newer ispLEVER compiler. Malcolm Rich Mellor wrote: The reason why it was not done, was that the manufacturer of the logic chip had been through a merger with another company, and as a result ended up changing all their developement software - requiring from me a seizable additional investment to buy it, along with an even bigger investment in time to learn how to use it (it's a different approach and programming 'l;anguage'). To make it worse, the actual logic chip ended up being scrapped by the new company, though, fortunately, there is still a compatible one available. -- Rich Mellor RWAP Services URL:http://www.rwapsoftware.co.uk URL:http://www.rwapservices.co.uk ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Rich Mellor wrote: Has anyone written to Stuart? My understanding is that he threw everything away. Nasta did once try to get his hands on that stuff. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
Re: [ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
This isn't a reply to any specific email that's been sent to the list on this subject more a general comment on my thoughts about the QL 'scene' as it currently stands. My interest in the QL has recently been rekindled. Some years ago I decided that I had the money to invest in a more modern QL system - I couldn't stretch to the likes of a Q40 but did manage to buy a SGC and Aurora. Although my knowledge of the system was extremely rusty I did manage to get it up and running - installed SMSQ and some other software with the intention of developing some software. Unfortuantely, I found it extremely difficult to get information on how to do so without spending a fair amount of money. The pointer environment was (and still is) a complete mystery as far as programming is concerned. I even subscribed to QL Today but found that the articles, though good, either referred to previous articles that I didn't have or assumed a level of knowledge that I didn't know how to gain. The Aurora machine has now been sold on and has a very good new home with Neil Riley. With the recent mention of the lack of available hardware, I considered the possibility of maybe porting SMSQ to the Amiga platform. QDOS Classic is already available for the amiga and works well - though for some reason it will only work on my 68000 machine and not on the faster 68030. My thought was that at least some of the work has already been done by creating the necessary drivers etc for the Amiga hardware - these seem to have been implemented as add on 'roms' for the QDOS environment. Whether something like this would be possible I don't know - I need to download the source for SMSQ and brush up my 680x0 assembly - it seems on the face of it to be feasible though. As for developing programs for the QDOS or SMSQ - where should I start? I still have a black box QL with a gold card, I've managed to resurrect a couple of working DD floppies. I am primarily a C programmer on Unix type systems, getting and installing a working C development environment on a floppy based system probably isn't practical. I don't have available money to invest in hardware or any commercial emulators - a lack of funds was one of the reasons that the Aurora system was sold in the first place. It's also true to be said that any new software development should really be done on a system that can handle the best the QL has to offer, that means a fast CPU and high colour drivers. My black box QL can hardly be said to fall into that category! :-) [Incidentally Neil, if you're reading this, no I don't for one moment regret selling the Aurora to you!] So, the upshot of all this (and sorry for rambling on) is that although I am willing to put some time into developing software for the QL, it seems that I either have to spend a not insubstantial amount of money on either hardware (which isn't necessarily available) or something like QPC. The alternative is to try and port SMSQ to a hardware platform that I already have access to (the Amiga). Although I would love to do this and indeed will have a look to see if I can manage it I suspect that it's a task that is way beyond my capabilities. I think we have to face the fact that the QL is a dying breed - we're not going to get any new hardware due to costs, and new software is only going to be developed by those already developing software. Partly because of the cost of getting a 'modern' QL system and partly because learning how to program such a system seems to be very, very difficult due to a lack of tutorials or available documentation. Once again sorry for the rambling email - I just thought I'd throw in my 2p to an interesting discussion! Phil ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
[ql-users] QL hardware and stuff
Jan Palenicek wrote: Oh well, then we only have to find some of those and we're all good. That should be easy ;-) I didn't say that there are not knowledged people Marcel. You are one of the gurus here and I respect your work and contributions. Thanks, but that's actually not my point. I just wonder why somebody who actually has the knowledge but no prior connection to the QL would want to invest any amount of time in it. For free. Not that I wouldn't be glad if somebody did, just wondering. In other words, I am saying that new people would be more interested in developing QL SW or HW if all the obstacles would disappear. Publishing all available documentation, schematics and source code would make much faster kick off of any new project. QL needs new projects. Well, what exactly would be needed here? The schematics etc. of the GC and SGC boards are unfortunately lost forever, I gather. I am sorry, it is possibly my fault that I am new here and I don't know the people. So, I am the one who want to buid Qubide. Can you give me the direction where can I get the schematics, please? Nasta, the designer, sometimes reads this list. At least he has answered one mail only a month ago ;-) Nasta, are you there? So hardware of that complexity is a pretty old hat. OK, but there are hundred(s) of black-box QL users without such device. But those are probably just happy with what they have and don't intend to expand in any way. At least this is my understanding. Disagree. Maybe you are thinking of your expanded advanced super QL on your desk, but my QL has only sandyQboard. So advancing has different meanings for us. I would be happy with: * Gold Card * Qubide. Fair enough. Unfortunately I don't see any good replacement for the GC. Regarding QubIDE, I've got the source code and ROM images for anybody interested. It's GPL anyway. The hardware side remains with Nasta, but I'll try to ask him about it. It was already pointed that some components in SGC doesn't exist, HW needs to be redesigned, but capable people here doesn't have time. I am proposing to ask general public and transforming this issue into challenge for developers. That might in the best case bring working device in the worst case nothing will happen. As I said, pretty much anything about the GC/SGC design is lost as far as I know. So a redesign is unfortunately not possible, any design would have to be done from scratch. Marcel ___ QL-Users Mailing List http://www.q-v-d.demon.co.uk/smsqe.htm
