Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Quite frankly, from what I've seen most Windows users would find Linux
simpler than one of the *freely* *available* IBM OSes (i.e. MVS, VM/360
"sixpack" and so on).
To avoid ambiguity: that was a typo, and I meant "VM/370 'sixpack'".
As background: it appears that IB
Steve wrote:
If you really think that using gas is going to allow existing 386 family
developers to write assembler for a 390 processor then I'm afraid you
are in for a sever disappointment. Understanding the assembler is a
minuscule part of the skill-set you will require. The newer opcodes do
On 23.08.2013 19:44, Steve wrote:
2) If an existing FPC developer wants to get involved, it's not
reasonable
to expect him to have to work up the learning curve of MVS before he can
actually run the target environment. Linux on Hercules is a no-brainer.
Linux on Hercules is a no-brainer for Lin
On 23/08/13 09:57, Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
1) The slightly newer opcodes make the 390 look more like the canonical CPUs
that most people are used to these days. Since any attempt to implement a
port without the help (or at least tolerant supervision) of the core
developers is doomed, I think tha
On 08/15/2013 12:16 PM, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 11:45:38 +0200
Jonas Maebe wrote:
On 15 Aug 2013, at 11:26, Mattias Gaertner wrote:
On Fri, 09 Aug 2013 23:10:05 +0200
Florian Klämpfl wrote:
Where did you get the CROSSOPT=-dFPC_ARMEL from? It is not needed at all.
I
Steve wrote:
Most of this is just pussy footing around the issue. Forgive me if I
misrepresent
your position here but it seems that you maintain that the implmentation
should
use a modern instruction set because 1) it generates simpler assembler
Yes.
2) it supports Linux and hence has lots
