I recall now... I knew I had none of the answers but I knew you would! So, what did you do to create the new instructions?
On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 5:29 PM, Ken Pettit <petti...@gmail.com> wrote: > I already have that. It supports 16M address space plus I already patched > the ROM so the ISR functions properly jump to the the lower 64K region and > return to the upper regions if needed. > > Ken > > > On 5/2/16 1:32 PM, Stephen Adolph wrote: >> >> ok, here is a proposal. Let's get a small FPGA and make an 80c85V2 >> that includes extra instructions...make it retro compatible. >> >> On Mon, May 2, 2016 at 4:19 PM, John R. Hogerhuis <jho...@pobox.com> >> wrote: >>> >>> >>> On Monday, May 2, 2016, Bruce H McIntosh <scots...@afn.org> wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2016-05-01 03:03, Hiraghm wrote: >>>>> >>>>> I know awhile back folks were talking about a CP/M port for the Model >>>>> T. >>>>> Earlier today I was watching some Youtube videos on CP/M, which >>>>> reminded >>>>> me of OS/9, and that got me wondering. >>>>> OS9 is re-entrant and position independent, multi-user and >>>>> multi-tasking. >>>>> The original OS9 was designed to operate in 64k of ram. >>>>> >>>> OS/9 had a lot of stuff that relied utterly upon the 6809 CPU's >>>> architectural quirks. It was eventually ported to the 68000 and 80386. >>>> The >>>> 8085 might be a bit of a stretch. >>>> >>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS-9 >>>> >>> And it would be slow. You would have to use some expensive tricks to >>> simulate position independent code. >>> >>> CP/M is way more doable and opens up access to a lot of compilers and >>> other >>> applications. The roadmap and hardware is all there for the cp/m project. >>> Just need the people and gumption to get it done. >>> >>> -- John. > >
