On Aug 20, 2020, at 4:30 AM, Jan-Benedict Glaw wrote:
> It's debateable whether or not the all-in-one builds are good or bad.
> Ie. GCC went into quite some development effort to gain LTO (link-time
> optimization) up'n'running, which was built quite exactly to allow
> optimizations that would ot
On Tue, 2020-08-18 19:52:47 -0700, Chris Hanson via cctalk
wrote:
> On Aug 18, 2020, at 5:50 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
> wrote:
> > On 8/17/20 5:34 PM, Chris Hanson via cctalk wrote:
> > > One thing that would make it much easier to experiment with SIMH
> > > in scenarios like this is if its
On Aug 17, 2020, at 12:43 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
I use NetBSD on a surplus HP ProLiant DL360p Gen8, NetBSD 9.0-stable
boots in just a few seconds. The hardware itself takes a couple minutes
to go through its bootstrap
On Aug 18, 2020, at 5:50 PM, Grant Taylor via cctalk
wrote:
>
> On 8/17/20 5:34 PM, Chris Hanson via cctalk wrote:
>> One thing that would make it much easier to experiment with SIMH in
>> scenarios like this is if its build system wasn't horribly redundant.
>
> Why are you mentioning SIMH's /
On 8/17/20 5:34 PM, Chris Hanson via cctalk wrote:
One thing that would make it much easier to experiment with SIMH in
scenarios like this is if its build system wasn't horribly redundant.
Why are you mentioning SIMH's /build/ system in a thread discussion boot
times?
I wouldn't object if SI
On Aug 17, 2020, at 4:28 PM, Chris Hanson via cctalk
wrote:
>
> NetBSD runs SIMH just fine and can be made to boot extremely quickly.
Oh yeah, NetBSD 9.0-stable 64-bit also only takes a few seconds to boot on a
Raspberry Pi 3B+. It's easy enough to just throw on an SD card and try out.
Alas t
One thing that would make it much easier to experiment with SIMH in scenarios
like this is if its build system wasn't horribly redundant. It genuinely looks
like someone looked at make and said "How can I turn this into a procedural
scripting system?" and then wrote the SIMH makefile in that sty
On Aug 17, 2020, at 12:43 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
>
> I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
> powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar clone systems based on SIMH.
NetBSD runs SIMH just fin
August 17, 2020 7:50 PM, "Chuck Guzis via cctalk" wrote:
> On 8/17/20 12:43 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote:
>
>> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
>>
>> I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
>> powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar c
On 8/17/20 12:43 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote:
> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
>
> I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
> powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar clone systems based on SIMH.
There are some very small versions of L
> On Aug 17, 2020, at 3:43 AM, Tom Hunter via cctalk
> wrote:
>
> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
>
> I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
> powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar clone systems based on SIMH.
>
> Thanks
> Tom Hu
There are multiple libraries for bare metal execution on the Pi, there are
trade offs with device support.
Circle comes to mind
https://github.com/rsta2/circle
On Mon, Aug 17, 2020, 11:14 AM Liam Proven via cctalk
wrote:
> On Mon, 17 Aug 2020 at 09:43, Tom Hunter via cctalk
> wrote:
> >
> > Ha
On Mon, 17 Aug 2020 at 09:43, Tom Hunter via cctalk
wrote:
>
> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
>
> I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
> powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar clone systems based on SIMH.
Not that I know of.
I have
Andrew Back wrote:
> Also wondered if SimH could be ported to a UEFI application. The
> environment seems to provide some O/S like features, but no idea how
> much would be missing or significantly different.
I made a set of stubs to compile and link a simulator without the SIMH
framework. Empty
On 17/08/2020 08:43, Tom Hunter via cctalk wrote:
> Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
>
> I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
> powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar clone systems based on SIMH.
Haven't seen anything, but Linux can be
Has SIMH been ported to a low overhead (instant-on) platform?
I ask the question because the startup time of Linux is distracting when
powering on a PiDP-11/70 or similar clone systems based on SIMH.
Thanks
Tom Hunter
16 matches
Mail list logo
