What hope for Risc OS 4 ?
Max Palmer
Just curious really, but what are the chances of RPC users ever getting
their hands on Risc OS 4 ? I recall hearing recently that Risc OS 4 was
still in need of quite a bit of testing at the time Phoebe was
cancelled. Anyone actually know what state it is currently in and just
how suitable it would be for a Risc PC ?
By the way, what exactly is Acorn up to at the moment and just how much
of it still involves developing Risc OS ?
Cheers,
Max
--
Max Palmer
Dickon Hood
Max Palmer <m...@autumn0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: Just curious really, but what are the chances of RPC users ever getting
: their hands on Risc OS 4 ?
Depending on who you speak to depends on what you hear. There *might* be an
upgrade, if we're all lucky; I for one could do with the 4MB RAM back...
: I recall hearing recently that Risc OS 4 was still in need of quite a bit
: of testing at the time Phoebe was cancelled. Anyone actually know what
: state it is currently in and just how suitable it would be for a Risc PC ?
Allegedly about 80% of the way there, but frankly it's more stable than 3.7
for me, significantly faster, and the features are worth it. Developers got
a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
: By the way, what exactly is Acorn up to at the moment and just how much
: of it still involves developing Risc OS ?
DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me, but
never mind.
--
Dickon Hood
Due to binaries posted to non-binary newsgroups, my .sig is
temporarily unavailable. Normal service will be resumed as soon as
possible. We apologise for the inconvenience in the mean time.
Peter Naulls
> : I recall hearing recently that Risc OS 4 was still in need of quite a bit
> : of testing at the time Phoebe was cancelled. Anyone actually know what
> : state it is currently in and just how suitable it would be for a Risc PC ?
>
> Allegedly about 80% of the way there, but frankly it's more stable than 3.7
> for me, significantly faster, and the features are worth it. Developers got
> a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
Agreed - but comparing against 3.6 - it almost feels like I've got a SA
(I have ARM710) at times - although I'm not sure if it's going to talk
to my CDROM.
--
+---------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
| Peter Naulls - pna...@usa.net | |
| http://chocky.home.ml.org/ | Java and JVM Consultant |
| Java for Risc OS and ARM - java...@usa.net | Technical Author |
| http://chocky.home.ml.org/java/ | Program performance analyst |
+---------------------------------------------+-----------------------------+
Paul Corke
<URL:mailto:dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> for me, significantly faster, and the features are worth it. Developers got
> a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
Have you actually tried it on SA? At least one of the developer
releases works on it.
Paul.
--
Interconnex UK Ltd
Box Bush Farm, West Wick, W-s-M, BS24 7TF. Tel & Fax: (01934) 522880.
mailto:pa...@interconnex.co.uk http://www.interconnex.co.uk/
Simon John
Peter Naulls <pna...@oregan.net> wrote:
> > I recall hearing recently that Risc OS 4 was still in need of quite a
> > bit of testing at the time Phoebe was cancelled. Anyone actually know what
> > state it is currently in and just how suitable it would be for a Risc PC?
> >
> > Allegedly about 80% of the way there, but frankly it's more stable than
> > 3.7 for me, significantly faster, and the features are worth it.
> > Developers got a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
> Agreed - but comparing against 3.6 - it almost feels like I've got a SA
> (I have ARM710) at times - although I'm not sure if it's going to talk
> to my CDROM.
Oh, so we'll probably get RISC 4.10 instead of 4.00 with all the bugs - or do
we get 4.70 that loads everything from ROM instead of 3.5 that loads from
disk! ;o)
--
Simon E. John
Email: sim...@argonet.co.uk
WWW: http://surf.to/simonsite
ICQ: 15267939
43rd Law of Computing: Anything that can go wr...
Dickon Hood
Paul Corke <pa...@interconnex.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <e55f3da348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>, Dickon Hood
: <URL:mailto:dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
: > for me, significantly faster, and the features are worth it. Developers
: > got a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
: Have you actually tried it on SA? At least one of the developer
: releases works on it.
Are you sure? I was never given one, and I was lead to believe that one
wouldn't be released, as leaking it could do Phoebe's sales a significant
amount of damage...
Paul Clark
> DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me, but
> never mind.
You don't watch TV or use the Web at all, then? IAMFI
P.
--
Paul Clark mailto:p...@sysmag.com $ whois pc52
Systems Magic Ltd. http://www.sysmag.com
Dickon Hood
Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
: Dickon Hood wrote:
: > DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me, but
: > never mind.
: You don't watch TV or use the Web at all, then? IAMFI
^^^^^-- ? New one on me.
I do very little of either. I prefer my entertainment more interactive (and,
admittedly, often more alcoholic ;-), and (despite an often-unloaded 64K
leased line), I find the WWW tediously slow. I use it for Dilbert, User
Friendly and the BOFH stories mostly, with technical documentation a close
fourth.
Paul Clark
>
> In message <3649CDE1...@sysmag.com>
> Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
>
> : Dickon Hood wrote:
>
> : > DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me, but
> : > never mind.
>
> : You don't watch TV or use the Web at all, then? IAMFI
> ^^^^^-- ? New one on me.
I Ask Merely For Information. Fair enough - I've confused my media -
wrong life.
(Although I often ask her, Merely never seems to know the answer (in
another medium/life again, Merely was the daughter of a rather vacant
old wandering guru type (who never actually appeared) who used to
collect 'brands' for a hobby and sit around chatting to people instead
of the serious business of trying to become a Wizard. Merely the
Warrior, to be precise))
> I do very little of either. I prefer my entertainment more interactive (and,
> admittedly, often more alcoholic ;-), and (despite an often-unloaded 64K
> leased line), I find the WWW tediously slow. I use it for Dilbert, User
> Friendly and the BOFH stories mostly, with technical documentation a close
> fourth.
Fair enough - I've noticed a lot of anti-digital/interactive-TV
sentiment round here, and was wondering if it was just pique at Acorn's
jilting you at the altar, so to speak, or if it went deeper.
Personally, I'm looking forward to having a multi-meg link and all the
world's written, audio and video material on demand and interlinked, but
I would say that, that's my job...
Richard Walker
Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> In message <YKFi6FA$50R2...@autumn0.demon.co.uk>
> Max Palmer <m...@autumn0.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>
> : Just curious really, but what are the chances of RPC users ever getting
> : their hands on Risc OS 4 ?
>
> Depending on who you speak to depends on what you hear. There *might* be
> an upgrade, if we're all lucky; I for one could do with the 4MB RAM
> back...
Ah, a 3.80 user! :-)
> Developers got a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
(Phoebe would have)
--
Richard.
"C'mon... Please please me, whoa yeah, like I please you."
Rhodri James
Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> In message <3649CDE1...@sysmag.com>
> Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
> : Dickon Hood wrote:
> : > DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask
> : > me, but never mind.
> : You don't watch TV or use the Web at all, then? IAMFI
> ^^^^^-- ? New one on
> me.
Ah, an old GROGGSism. "I Ask Merely For Information", or on occasion, "I
Ask Mostly For Irritation."
> I do very little of either. I prefer my entertainment more interactive
> (and, admittedly, often more alcoholic ;-), and (despite an
> often-unloaded 64K leased line), I find the WWW tediously slow. I use
> it for Dilbert, User Friendly and the BOFH stories mostly, with
> technical documentation a close fourth.
Likewise, I must say, though we might be stretching things calling
csa.misc "interactive." Then again, the Sci-Fi channel has just undergone
a facelift and seems to have acquired some decent programmes....
--
Rhodri James *-* Wildebeeste herder to the masses
If you don't know who I work for, you can't misattribute my words to them
... Worse things happen in C
Dickon Hood
In message <364A0162...@sysmag.com>
Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
: Dickon Hood wrote:
: > In message <3649CDE1...@sysmag.com>
: > Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
: > : Dickon Hood wrote:
: > : > DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me, but
: > : > never mind.
: > : You don't watch TV or use the Web at all, then? IAMFI
: > ^^^^^-- ? New one on me.
: I Ask Merely For Information. Fair enough - I've confused my media -
: wrong life.
Know the problem... Actually, someone did know what it meant, just about ten
minutes after I posted...
: > I do very little of either. I prefer my entertainment more interactive
: > (and, admittedly, often more alcoholic ;-), and (despite an
: > often-unloaded 64K leased line), I find the WWW tediously slow. I use it
: > for Dilbert, User Friendly and the BOFH stories mostly, with technical
: > documentation a close fourth.
: Fair enough - I've noticed a lot of anti-digital/interactive-TV
: sentiment round here, and was wondering if it was just pique at Acorn's
: jilting you at the altar, so to speak, or if it went deeper.
No, I dislike the concept. I particularly dislike the view that the
Internet == World Wide Web; this is entirely untrue (as any reader of Usenet
should know, but many I suspect do not). I do not spend a significant
quantity of time browsing (it's dull, IMHO); the time I spend on line is
usually spent chatting to people on talkers, or reading / writing news and
mail.
: Personally, I'm looking forward to having a multi-meg link and all the
: world's written, audio and video material on demand and interlinked, but
Yes, it has potential. However, the net is too slow, the world-wide wait is
dull, and there is so little information out there, buried under the crud,
that it's barely worth the time searching for it. Excuse the jaundiced view,
but I've seen the s/n ratio of the WWW and Usenet be decimated to the point
that they're barely usable, and frankly I don't see that hundreds of
thousands of newbies accessing them via their television sets is going to
improve matters...
: I would say that, that's my job...
Mine too :-)
Dickon Hood
Richard Walker <runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
: In message <e55f3da348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>
: Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
: > Depending on who you speak to depends on what you hear. There *might* be
: > an upgrade, if we're all lucky; I for one could do with the 4MB RAM
: > back...
: Ah, a 3.80 user! :-)
Occasionally.
: > Developers got a nobbled version which doesn't run on SA.
: Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
: chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
: (Phoebe would have)
No; I have it on good authority that it disables lazy paging if the SA is
bugged.
Dickon Hood
Rhodri James <rho...@wildebst.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <7eac6ea348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>,
: Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
: > I do very little [web browsing / telly watching]. I prefer my
: > entertainment more interactive (and, admittedly, often more alcoholic
: > ;-), and (despite an often-unloaded 64K leased line), I find the WWW
: > tediously slow. I use it for Dilbert, User Friendly and the BOFH stories
: > mostly, with technical documentation a close fourth.
: Likewise, I must say, though we might be stretching things calling
: csa.misc "interactive."
It has some feedback, which is more than the average television programme.
It isn't real-time (usually), but that's not the same thing.
: Then again, the Sci-Fi channel has just undergone a facelift and seems to
: have acquired some decent programmes....
You mean B5?
Darren Salt
> In article <7eac6ea348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>,
> Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
>> In message <3649CDE1...@sysmag.com>
>> Paul Clark <p...@sysmag.com> wrote:
>>> Dickon Hood wrote:
>>>> DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me,
>>>> but never mind.
>>> You don't watch TV or use the Web at all, then? IAMFI
>> ^^^^^--? New one on me.
> Ah, an old GROGGSism. "I Ask Merely For Information", or on occasion, "I
> Ask Mostly For Irritation."
Hmm. On seeing the expansion, I thought "Marvin"...
[snip rest]
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | nr. Ashington, | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| Risc PC, Spectrum +3, | Northumberland | ds@zap,uk,eu,org
| A3010, BBC Master 128 | Toon Army | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk
| Ni!
After purchasing an item, you will find it on sale next week.
ag.
<dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> You mean B5?
which off topic question begs answering. When is the last 5 episodes to be
shown UK Ch.4???
--
Stewart Brodie
> Then again, the Sci-Fi channel has just undergone a facelift and seems to
> have acquired some decent programmes....
They changed the name too - to just "Sci-Fi".
--
Stewart Brodie, Software Engineer
Acorn Computers Ltd
Acorn House, 645 Newmarket Road
Cambridge, CB5 8PB, United Kingdom WWW: http://www.acorn.com/
john_pe...@my-dejanews.com
ag. <a...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
(about Babylon 5)
> which off topic question begs answering. When is the last 5 episodes to be
> shown UK Ch.4???
According to the Lurker's Guide, sometime around Christmas. I never understand
the way US networks schedule stuff (apparently, the eps were held so they
wouldn't be shown here first). Still, at least we're getting the first series
again on Sunday night/Monday morning.
John
--
Asst Editor, trends in Biotechnology
john_pe...@my-dejanews.com
http://fly.to/silent.planet
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Steve Knattress
Dickon Hood <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> : By the way, what exactly is Acorn up to at the moment and just how much
> : of it still involves developing Risc OS ?
> DiTV ('Digital Interactive Television'). Loathesome idea if you ask me,
> but never mind.
I am considering the offers from Digital Television at the moment. ( Only
a professional interest you understand!).
Sky and OnDigital are offering lots set top boxes from various
manufactures, is Acorn included? , or have they missed the boat again?
Steve.
--
Steve Knattress,
using RiscPC(SA) through Argonet, with !Voyager (2.00) and !Pluto
Stuart Halliday
> Sky and OnDigital are offering lots set top boxes from various
> manufactures, is Acorn included? ,
No.
> or have they missed the boat again?
Only the companies that could afford to put in 400 Million Pounds each were
allowed in. Acorn of course were not even on the pier.
Acorn have said that the Digital boxes on sale now are really just 1st
generation where as they have the 2nd generation boxes.
ie, Acorn offer features like Picture in Picture, true interactive control
and have anti-twitter displays which neither OnDigital or Sky offer.
(The Sky box's menus really flickers on screen when used with a 50Hz large
TV!)
I've even heard of boxes with 20GB harddrives in them that are in development
so that users can time shift TV programmes, etc. in the future.
--
Stuart Halliday
Acorn Cybervillage
http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/
Stewart Brodie
ag. <a...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <1c71c1a348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>, Dickon Hood
> <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> > You mean B5?
>
> which off topic question begs answering. When is the last 5 episodes to be
> shown UK Ch.4???
According to the Radio Times, the reshowing of the pilot heralds the start
of repeats from the beginning on Channel 4 ... try asking Channel 4 directly.
James MacDonald
<dicko...@fluff.org> wrote (in 29 lines):
>: Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
>: chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
>: (Phoebe would have)
>
>No; I have it on good authority that it disables lazy paging if the SA is
>bugged.
Hmm.. when more RiscPC SA cards are made to rectify the current
shortage, will they have rev T SA chips on board?
--
Supporting CUT: http://www.unmetered.org.uk/
We are John Cage of Borg. Assimilation troubles us;
we have to take a moment. Poughkeepsie.
Dickon Hood
James MacDonald <tr...@netbook.demon.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <ec3ec1a348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>, Dickon Hood
: <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote (in 29 lines):
: >: Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
: >: chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
: >: (Phoebe would have)
: >No; I have it on good authority that it disables lazy paging if the SA is
: >bugged.
: Hmm.. when more RiscPC SA cards are made to rectify the current
: shortage, will they have rev T SA chips on board?
I think the question should probably be phrased: 'are any more RPC SA cards
going to be made, and if so, will they have rev. T SAs on them, and if so,
can I have one, please?'.
Peter Smith
Stewart Brodie <sbr...@acorn.com> wrote:
> In message <na.94fcc848...@argonet.co.uk>
> ag. <a...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > In article <1c71c1a348%dicko...@splurge.fluff.org>, Dickon Hood
> > <dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> > > You mean B5?
> >
> > which off topic question begs answering. When is the last 5 episodes to
> > be shown UK Ch.4???
>
> According to the Radio Times, the reshowing of the pilot heralds the start
> of repeats from the beginning on Channel 4 ... try asking Channel 4
> directly.
>
We have another B5 fan in our midst :-)
I've not seen you on a.b5.uk yet, like everyone else here !
Peter
--
To reply by mail, change .com to .co in my email address
54 things to do in a lift....
7. Shave.
Martin Tee
Richard Walker <runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
[snip]
> Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
> chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
> (Phoebe would have)
Some of us with bugged rev J/K SAs on the NetBSD/arm32 mail list are
looking into having a chip replacement to rev T. This should be available
about Feb 99 according to Simtec. Anyone want to join us? It doesn't have
to be Simtec, IFEL (amongst others, I'm sure) can do the job, but need a
minimum order of 60. Support your favourite supplier!
I don't know if this will enable us to run ROS4, but you never know! BTW
price should be less than £100.
Regards
--
I may not always be perfect, but I'm always me.
___
|\/| _.._ _|_ o._ | _ _
| |(_|| |_ || | |(/_(/_
marti...@argonet.co.uk http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/martin.tee/
Simon John
Martin Tee <marti...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <1ccf63a348%runny...@breckonhill.demon.co.uk>,
> Richard Walker <runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
> [snip]
> > Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
> > chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
> > (Phoebe would have)
> Some of us with bugged rev J/K SAs on the NetBSD/arm32 mail list are
> looking into having a chip replacement to rev T. This should be available
> about Feb 99 according to Simtec. Anyone want to join us? It doesn't have
> to be Simtec, IFEL (amongst others, I'm sure) can do the job, but need a
> minimum order of 60. Support your favourite supplier!
> I don't know if this will enable us to run ROS4, but you never know! BTW
> price should be less than £100.
I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a 233MHz SA
and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
--
Simon E. John
Email: sim...@argonet.co.uk
WWW: http://surf.to/simonsite
ICQ: 15267939
Every message from now on shall be in Morse Code.
dgs
Simon John <sim...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Some of us with bugged rev J/K SAs on the NetBSD/arm32 mail list are
> > looking into having a chip replacement to rev T. This should be available
> > about Feb 99 according to Simtec. Anyone want to join us? It doesn't have
> > to be Simtec, IFEL (amongst others, I'm sure) can do the job, but need a
> > minimum order of 60. Support your favourite supplier!
> >
> > I don't know if this will enable us to run ROS4, but you never know! BTW
> > price should be less than £100.
>
> I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a 233MHz SA
> and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
silicon on it for under 100ukp.
Manchester Acorn User Group - http://www.acorn.manchester.ac.uk/
RPC x86 Card Info Pages - http://acorn.cybervillage.co.uk/pccard/
"Your machine is NOT dead until it stops working" - Ian Gledhill
Dunstan Orchard
> He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> silicon on it for under 100ukp.
What is this revision T silicon thing?
I've never heard of it, so I don't kow if I want one or not. Any info for
us (it's probably only me) people not in the know?
thanks - dunstan
--
dun...@argonet.co.uk
http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/dunstan
Simon John
> > > Some of us with bugged rev J/K SAs on the NetBSD/arm32 mail list are
> > > looking into having a chip replacement to rev T. This should be available
> > > about Feb 99 according to Simtec. Anyone want to join us? It doesn't have
> > > to be Simtec, IFEL (amongst others, I'm sure) can do the job, but need a
> > > minimum order of 60. Support your favourite supplier!
> > >
> > > I don't know if this will enable us to run ROS4, but you never know! BTW
> > > price should be less than £100.
> >
> > I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a 233MHz SA
> > and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
> He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> silicon on it for under 100ukp.
So why's an SA upgrade 275ukp - is that Acorn's value of RISC OS 3.7?
So less than 100ukp and probably 50ukp for RISC OS4 = <150ukp for SA and RISC
OS4 isn't bad - epecially when we could probably sell the 202.4MHz devices
and RISC OS 3.70 (or 233/3.71) for 100ukp.
If only we *COULD* get hold of RISC OS4..... ;o)
--
Simon E. John
Email: sim...@argonet.co.uk
WWW: http://surf.to/simonsite
ICQ: 15267939
Drink, feck, arse, girls!
Alan Wrigley
john_pe...@my-dejanews.com wrote:
> In article <na.94fcc848...@argonet.co.uk>,
> ag. <a...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> (about Babylon 5)
> > which off topic question begs answering. When is the last 5 episodes to be
> > shown UK Ch.4???
>
> According to the Lurker's Guide, sometime around Christmas. I never understand
> the way US networks schedule stuff
What seems to happen is that they show half or 2/3rds of a series, then
repeat them all (out of sequence and with a few episodes from earlier
series thrown in just to confuse you even more) before showing the last
few episodes. I presume the reason is that Americans watch so much
television that they would have forgotten by the time the next series
starts what was happening at the end of the previous one.
> Still, at least we're getting the first series
> again on Sunday night/Monday morning.
Oh good. So with impromptu reschedulings, transmitter repairs and all
the other gremlins that occur overnight on Sundays, I can look forward
to my VCR missing whole chunks of programmes.
Alan
--
Alan Wrigley http://www.cybervillage.co.uk/alan/
Software engineer, photographer
Martin Tee
dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <48a4f265...@argonet.co.uk>,
> Simon John <sim...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > Some of us with bugged rev J/K SAs on the NetBSD/arm32 mail list are
> > > looking into having a chip replacement to rev T. This should be
> > > available about Feb 99 according to Simtec. Anyone want to join us?
> > > It doesn't have to be Simtec, IFEL (amongst others, I'm sure) can do
> > > the job, but need a minimum order of 60. Support your favourite
> > > supplier!
> > >
> > > I don't know if this will enable us to run ROS4, but you never know!
> > > BTW price should be less than £100.
> >
> > I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a
> > 233MHz SA and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
> He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> silicon on it for under 100ukp.
Plan is to send your current SA card (rev J/K whatever) to Simtec who
remove old SA and replace (using their surface mounted chip machine) with
rev T SA. Your *original* card is then returned to you. Estimate is < £100
inclusive VAT and p&p (UK only).
Regards,
--
Southern DOS: Y'all reckon? (yep/Nope)
Martin Tee
[snip]
> I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a 233MHz
> SA and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
Rev T SA would be replacement on your original StrongARM card and clock
speed would be unchanged. You can alter it yourself if you want to risk
potential timing problems.
All this doesn't get you ROS4 though :-(
Regards,
--
Rubber bands have snappy endings!
Dickon Hood
Dunstan Orchard <dun...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
: In article <48a4f4...@argonet.co.uk>, dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
: > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
: > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
: What is this revision T silicon thing?
: I've never heard of it, so I don't kow if I want one or not. Any info for
: us (it's probably only me) people not in the know?
If you're planning on running ROS 4, NetBSD/arm32 or Linux/arm, then yes, it
might be useful. The rev. T CPU has all the bugs fixed which the revs. J and
K have. These don't affect RISC OS in the slightest, but hammer BSD and
Linux where it hurts; ROS 4 using a technique called 'lazy paging' will also
be hit, which is why it disables the lazy paging on earlier SAs. Given that
there isn't an SA-aware ROS 4 out there, the point is moot.
Chris Rutter
> Isn't that because Ursula /needs/ a StrongARM-110 revision T (bug fixed)
> chip, and all the SA-based Risc PCs on this planet don't have them?
> (Phoebe would have)
No. ;-)
--
Chris <ch...@fluff.org> ( http://www.fluff.org/chris )
Greg Hennessy
<dun...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>What is this revision T silicon thing?
>I've never heard of it, so I don't kow if I want one or not. Any info for
>us (it's probably only me) people not in the know?
FWIH, If you have any fantasies of running ROS4 on your RPC, a
revision T chip is necessary to make it work due the bugs in previous
versions.
greg
Andrew Veitch
<URL:mailto:cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> FWIH, If you have any fantasies of running ROS4 on your RPC, a
> revision T chip is necessary to make it work due the bugs in previous
> versions.
FWIH, parts of ROS4 don't necessarily require the Ursula kernel to run.
--
Andrew Veitch mailto:a...@who.net
Vision Internet Services http://www.vision.u-net.com/
(Speaking personally)
|- In light of recent events, this tagline has been removed -|
Richard Walker
cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk (Greg Hennessy) wrote:
> On Sat, 14 Nov 1998 18:28:15 GMT, Dunstan Orchard
> <dun...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > What is this revision T silicon thing? I've never heard of it, so I
> > don't kow if I want one or not. Any info for us (it's probably only
> > me) people not in the know?
>
> FWIH, If you have any fantasies of running ROS4 on your RPC, a
> revision T chip is necessary to make it work due the bugs in previous
> versions.
That's what I thought, especially with the way which 'soft' Ursula
apparently hangs when you try it with a StrongARM card.
But then Dickon Hood suggested that it's rigged to do that, and the 'real'
Ursula would work on pre-RevT chips, but with lazy task swapping disabled.
And, for what it's worth, I'll take his word for it over mine and yours!
Oh, and they say that Linux and BSD are hurt by the bugs in the pre-RevT
chips, which is why Simtec are thinking of offering a 'debug' service!
--
Richard.
"All you need is love, love. Love is all you need."
Lionel Smith
cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk (Greg Hennessy) wrote:
> bugs in previous versions.
Bugs in previous versions of what, the OS, the SA or the HGTTG.
Pray be more specific.
Your starter for ten, and I do know the answer. ;-)
Lionel
--
___ ______
/ / / ___/ 6 grandchildren | Sea Vixen for pugnacity
/ / ionel A.| \ mith 4 children & 1 dog | Hunter for elegance
/ /____ __\ | No wonder life is a breeze | Phantom for clout
/_______/ /_____/ lio...@argonet.co.uk | IT Tech. Supp. | ZFC B+2
Join a Microsoft Foundation Class, and go away brainwashed.
Matthew Bullock
> On Sat, 14 Nov 1998 18:28:15 GMT, Dunstan Orchard
> <dun...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> >What is this revision T silicon thing?
> >I've never heard of it, so I don't kow if I want one or not. Any info for
> >us (it's probably only me) people not in the know?
>
> FWIH, If you have any fantasies of running ROS4 on your RPC, a
> revision T chip is necessary to make it work due the bugs in previous
> versions.
Rubbish, the minor bug in pre revsion T SAs would adversly effect
the lazy task swapping and that's all (meaning not so much of an
improvment in task switching speed). The only reason that a RiscPC
version of RiscOS 4 is not available is because there is a fair
amount of work to do to get it to work on pre Phoebe hardware. (Oh
and there's the minor point about Acorn giving up on developing it,
but there's nothing to stop someone else doing the work).
Matthew
--
Matthew Bullock
http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/matthew.bullock/
Dickon Hood
Matthew Bullock <matthew...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
: In article <364f1702...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk>, Greg Hennessy
: <URL:mailto:cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
: > On Sat, 14 Nov 1998 18:28:15 GMT, Dunstan Orchard
: > <dun...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
: > >What is this revision T silicon thing?
: > >I've never heard of it, so I don't kow if I want one or not. Any info for
: > >us (it's probably only me) people not in the know?
: > FWIH, If you have any fantasies of running ROS4 on your RPC, a
: > revision T chip is necessary to make it work due the bugs in previous
: > versions.
: Rubbish, the minor bug in pre revsion T SAs would adversly effect
: the lazy task swapping and that's all (meaning not so much of an
: improvment in task switching speed).
Indeed.
: The only reason that a RiscPC version of RiscOS 4 is not available is
: because there is a fair amount of work to do to get it to work on pre
: Phoebe hardware.
What? You are *seriously* suggesting that Acorn should develop the entire OS
on just Phoebe architecture? That's clearly bogus. I know several people at
Acorn who are running ROS 3.8 as their primary Risc OS on SA machines.
: (Oh and there's the minor point about Acorn giving up on developing it, but
: there's nothing to stop someone else doing the work).
Whoever said that?
Greg Hennessy
<runny...@mindless.com> wrote:
>But then Dickon Hood suggested that it's rigged to do that, and the 'real'
>Ursula would work on pre-RevT chips, but with lazy task swapping disabled.
>And, for what it's worth, I'll take his word for it over mine and yours!
True, however FWIH, a lot of the performance benefits of ROS4 is due
to the lazy task swapping.
greg
Greg Hennessy
wrote:
>In article <364f1702...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk>,
>cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk (Greg Hennessy) wrote:
>
>> bugs in previous versions.
>
>Bugs in previous versions of what, the OS, the SA or the HGTTG.
The SA.
greg
Roger Lynn
Simon John <sim...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <48a4f4...@argonet.co.uk>,
> dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
>
> So why's an SA upgrade 275ukp - is that Acorn's value of RISC OS 3.7?
For 275UKP you got an SA chip, the processor card it was mounted on,
RISC OS 3.7, a lot of R&D and VAT. For the 100UKP all you get is a chip
and a fitting service (dunno about VAT).
Roger
Matthew Bullock
<URL:mailto:dicko...@fluff.org> wrote:
> In message <ant16223...@qq83.dial.pipex.com>
> Matthew Bullock <matthew...@dial.pipex.com> wrote:
>
> : In article <364f1702...@nntp.netcomuk.co.uk>, Greg Hennessy
> : <URL:mailto:cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> : > FWIH, If you have any fantasies of running ROS4 on your RPC, a
> : > revision T chip is necessary to make it work due the bugs in previous
> : > versions.
>
> : Rubbish, the minor bug in pre revsion T SAs would adversly effect
> : the lazy task swapping and that's all (meaning not so much of an
> : improvment in task switching speed).
>
> Indeed.
>
> : The only reason that a RiscPC version of RiscOS 4 is not available is
> : because there is a fair amount of work to do to get it to work on pre
> : Phoebe hardware.
>
> What? You are *seriously* suggesting that Acorn should develop the
> entire OS on just Phoebe architecture? That's clearly bogus.
No, I'm simply saying that to get a finished, complete version of RiscOS
4 with /all/ the new features still requires quite a bit of work.
Obviously Acorn were developing it on RiscPCs.
Liam Gretton
<URL:mailto:cmk...@cix.compulink.co.uk> wrote:
> True, however FWIH, a lot of the performance benefits of ROS4 is due to
> the lazy task swapping.
Yes, and on an ARM610, the difference really is significant. The
desktop feels as responisve as it does with a SA machine. There are also
improvements to module service call handling which can reduce the load on
the machine.
--
Liam Gretton l...@star.le.ac.uk
Space Research Centre, li...@binliner.demon.co.uk
Physics and Astronomy Dept, phone +44 (0) 116 223 1039
Leicester University, fax +44 (0) 116 252 2464
Leicester LE1 7RH, UK http://xmm4.xra.le.ac.uk/
druck
> Yes, and on an ARM610, the difference really is significant. The
> desktop feels as responisve as it does with a SA machine. There are also
> improvements to module service call handling which can reduce the load on
> the machine.
Except during boot up, the service call load is insignificant,
usually around 3 per sec, rising to 80 if you really kick the
machine. Compared it with 6,000 null polls and 90,000 SWI calls
per second.
--druck
Thomas Rankin
Martin Tee <marti...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
> Plan is to send your current SA card (rev J/K whatever) to Simtec who
> remove old SA and replace (using their surface mounted chip machine) with
> rev T SA. Your *original* card is then returned to you. Estimate is < £100
> inclusive VAT and p&p (UK only).
>
> Regards,
>
So they won't be sending a different card back to you on receipt of yours and
then modify yours for someone else to keep throughput nice and quick.
--
Thomas Rankin
dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a 233MHz SA
> > and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
>
> He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> silicon on it for under 100ukp.
>
Then I would be well up for it, where do I sign up?
Shame it is an upgrade for an original SA card :-(.
--
Martin Tee
Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48a503d05f...@argonet.co.uk>
> Martin Tee <marti...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> > > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
> > Plan is to send your current SA card (rev J/K whatever) to Simtec who
> > remove old SA and replace (using their surface mounted chip machine)
> > with rev T SA. Your *original* card is then returned to you. Estimate
> > is < £100 inclusive VAT and p&p (UK only).
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> So they won't be sending a different card back to you on receipt of
> yours and then modify yours for someone else to keep throughput nice and
> quick.
No, I'm afraid not. But the turn round should be pretty quick, if they're
not too busy building CATS, Beowolf & Forbidden Tech machines that is ;-)
If you want to be kept informed of developments, I can add you to my list.
Simtec also told me they would make an announcement on the n/gs when they
get the necessary components.
--
S met ing's hap ening t my k ybo rd . .
Glyn Royds
> > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
> Plan is to send your current SA card (rev J/K whatever) to Simtec who
> remove old SA and replace (using their surface mounted chip machine)
> with rev T SA. Your *original* card is then returned to you. Estimate
> is < £100 inclusive VAT and p&p (UK only).
What are the advantages of the Rev T StrongARM? I've not been keeping
up with stuff happening in the ARM world of late - don't seem to have
had any news in c.s.arm in ages (will have to check my newsfeed).
Cheers, Glyn.
--
_ __ __ All views expressed in news postings are
/ '/ __ /_/__ __//_ my own and may have no relation whatsoever
/_///_// / / |/_//_//_/__/ to the views of my employer.
,_/ ,_/ ,_/
Learned men are the cisterns of knowledge, not the fountainheads.
Henry Helliwell
<URL:mailto:postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48a4f4...@argonet.co.uk>
> dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
> > > I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a 233MHz SA
> > > and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
> >
> > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
> >
> Then I would be well up for it, where do I sign up?
> Shame it is an upgrade for an original SA card :-(.
It's better than nothing. I'd sign up for one if I had 100 ukp to spare...
--
Henry Helliwell
he...@stohelit.demon.co.uk
Rey Cobham
Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48a4f4...@argonet.co.uk>
> dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > > I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a
> > > 233MHz SA and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
> >
> > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
> > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
> >
> Then I would be well up for it, where do I sign up?
> Shame it is an upgrade for an original SA card :-(.
As someone who doesn't yet have a SA (but has one on order) is it likely
that the Rev T's will be shipped (with future RISC OS versions)?
ie. Should I hold back from getting a SA upgrade now that will need to be
modified to make full use of RISC OS 4? Mind you if the suggested price
for RO 4 really is 129 UKp + VAT then I wont be getting one for a good 6
months now anyhow - up to 100 quid I could just about manage but 150 ish
hmmm. Already spent way too much since Black Thursday. $o)
TTFN
Rey
--
The Dark Lord Of All is awaiting his sig. file
Web-Site: TBA Real Soon
E-Mail: fo...@argonet.co.uk
Thomas Rankin
Rey Cobham <fo...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Already spent way too much since Black Thursday. $o)
Strangely enough so have I.
Has anyone else found the urge to go through a spending spree during this
period?
--
Stephen J. Crocker
<fo...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>In article <9729caa48%postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk>,
> Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <48a4f4...@argonet.co.uk>
>> dgs <d...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>> > > I wouldn't mind trading in my 202.4MHz SA and RISC OS 3.70 for a
>> > > 233MHz SA and RISC OS 4 for under £100 if that's what you mean.
>> >
>> > He doesn't. He means getting a StrongARM card with revision T
>> > silicon on it for under 100ukp.
>> >
>> Then I would be well up for it, where do I sign up?
>> Shame it is an upgrade for an original SA card :-(.
>As someone who doesn't yet have a SA (but has one on order) is it likely
>that the Rev T's will be shipped (with future RISC OS versions)?
>ie. Should I hold back from getting a SA upgrade now that will need to be
>modified to make full use of RISC OS 4? Mind you if the suggested price
>for RO 4 really is 129 UKp + VAT then I wont be getting one for a good 6
>months now anyhow - up to 100 quid I could just about manage but 150 ish
>hmmm. Already spent way too much since Black Thursday. $o)
I think that they're selling Rev T SA cards ATM. Are they still
selling the old ones?
Jon
Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48ae61d...@argonet.co.uk>
> Rey Cobham <fo...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Already spent way too much since Black Thursday. $o)
> Strangely enough so have I.
> Has anyone else found the urge to go through a spending spree during this
> period?
Yes ;)
Jon - very skint (check the Comic Relief site!)
--
_
| | ___ _ __ S/A RPC* 42MB* X24 CD* 4.3 Gig HDD
_ | |/ _ \| '_ \ jgh...@argonet.co.uk * j...@acornarcade.com
| |_| | (_) | | | | http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/jghall/
\___/ \___/|_| |_| ZFC Nb* IRC #hashargonet* Run the RISC!
ICQ 21129860 Oh, I have a PeeCee as well;)
Thomas Rankin
Jon <jgh...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> Yes ;)
> Jon - very skint (check the Comic Relief site!)
>
I will when I'm on-line, but I have just noticed that it's YOU that outbid me
for the joystick! GIT! :-p
--
Another gem from the ZapEmail default signatures file.
Jon
Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48aeb7a5...@argonet.co.uk>
> Jon <jgh...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > Yes ;)
> > Jon - very skint (check the Comic Relief site!)
> >
> I will when I'm on-line, but I have just noticed that it's YOU that outbid me
> for the joystick! GIT! :-p
Hehe - yup, sure was;)
Just don't tell the wife!
Jon.
Stuart Tyrrell
Jon <jgh...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <19892faf48%postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk>,
> Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > In message <48aeb7a5...@argonet.co.uk>
> > Jon <jgh...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>
> > > Yes ;)
> > > Jon - very skint (check the Comic Relief site!)
> > >
> > I will when I'm on-line, but I have just noticed that it's YOU
> > that outbid me for the joystick! GIT! :-p
>
> Hehe - yup, sure was;)
> Just don't tell the wife!
Oooo - now, do you think you've bid enough to buy our silence? ;-)
I'm currently tying up the design, and it's looking very nice - I
don't want to say too much at the moment, but it's not beyond the
realms of possibility that it'll include some very nice artificial
intelligence - enough to provide humorous comment on your game style!
Just to inform people who don't know:
This is possibly the worlds first and only talking joystick interface.
It'll be useable with your Acorn, or as a stand-alone device (great
down the pub).
It will *only* be available via the "Great Acorn auction in aid of
Comic Relief" - *please* don't contact me asking how you can buy one -
you can't! See http://www.acornusers.org/comicrelief for details.
There will be one device made for "review", which will be
"de-comissioned" after reviews are complete.
There will be one device which I'll drag along to shows to keep people
amused.
Now, the question I have is whether to build one or more for the CR
auction. Given how much it'll cost to build them, I think we're
probably talking of a choice of either 1 or 3 interfaces.
What do people think about this? Of course, from an "exclusivity"
point of view, it's probably better if we only release one - but I
guess that we'd have to be looking at a bid of ~UKP300 to make this a
better option - but I don't want to bring the bids down by spoiling
the "exclusivity" (I'd rather have one bid of UKP150 than 3 bids of
UKP40).
Anyone?
Stuart.
--
Stuart Tyrrell Developments Stu...@stdevel.demon.co.uk
PO Box 183, OLDHAM. OL2 8FB http://www.stdevel.demon.co.uk
Orange: 0976 255 256 (9am-9pm) dFax: 0870 164 1604 (National rate)
**NEW** Touchpad from UKP29.95 ** PS2Mouse+ now available UKP39.95
Jon
Stuart Tyrrell <Stu...@stdevel.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48af333a...@argonet.co.uk>
> Jon <jgh...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> > In article <19892faf48%postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk>,
> > Thomas Rankin <postm...@sanguinarius.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > > In message <48aeb7a5...@argonet.co.uk>
> > > Jon <jgh...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> >
> > > > Yes ;)
> > > > Jon - very skint (check the Comic Relief site!)
> > > >
> > > I will when I'm on-line, but I have just noticed that it's YOU
> > > that outbid me for the joystick! GIT! :-p
> >
> > Hehe - yup, sure was;)
> > Just don't tell the wife!
> Oooo - now, do you think you've bid enough to buy our silence? ;-)
I bl**dy well hope so!
Hedley Hunnisett
RC> As someone who doesn't yet have a SA (but has one on order) is it
RC> likely that the Rev T's will be shipped (with future RISC OS
RC> versions)?
I bought a 233 MHz StrongARM card and fitted it to my RPC at the end of
August. Is it possible to find whether it's revision T without taking off the
lid? (It's set up in an awkward corner alcove). Tried *devices and got 'File
devices not found'. :-(
--
Hedley Hunnisett of Wigston Magna, Leicestershire, England
hed...@arcticbb.demon.co.uk
*** !DigiMail 1.4.6 (28-Mar-1998) - The Acorn BBS OLR ***
Anti-UCE address: hedleyh at arcticbb dot demon period co period uk
Please translate this Anti-UCE address for private replies - thank you.
--
++++ ArcTic BBS - Internet Gateway - Email - NewsGroups ++++
++ http://www.arcticbb.demon.co.uk - +44 1819031309 24hrs ++
Andy Carter
Hedley Hunnisett <address...@nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[snip]
> I bought a 233 MHz StrongARM card and fitted it to my RPC at the end of
> August. Is it possible to find whether it's revision T without taking
> off the lid? (It's set up in an awkward corner alcove). Tried *devices
> and got 'File devices not found'. :-(
I thought ArmSI gave this info, but a recent post suggested this is not
the case. It gives rev 2 here for my very early SA, or is this a different
rev?
Anyone know for sure?
Andy
--
fr...@argonet.co.uk - http://www.argonet.co.uk/homepages/fruit/
Subscribe to the RiscCAD mail-list.
James MacDonald
>I bought a 233 MHz StrongARM card and fitted it to my RPC at the end of
>August. Is it possible to find whether it's revision T without taking off the
>lid? (It's set up in an awkward corner alcove).
Well, the best way is to rip the lid off, but if you can't do that,
maybe someone can devise a test using a little of the lazy task-swapping
code that will fail under a Rev. R with RO4. Maybe someone working with
UNIX might know a snippet; AFAIR Rev R. is harmless to RO3.7, but
hammers proper multi-tasking operating systems because of the bug: RO4
moves closer to a 'proper' OS, and so gets hit.
>Tried *devices and got 'File
>devices not found'. :-(
'Cos your processor isn't a SCSI processor (yes, you can get them!), and
you don't have a SCSI card.
--
Supporting CUT: http://www.unmetered.org.uk/
We are John Cage of Borg. Assimilation troubles us;
we have to take a moment. Poughkeepsie.
John P Baker
Thomas Boroske
James MacDonald <tr...@netbook.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> Well, the best way is to rip the lid off, but if you can't do that,
> maybe someone can devise a test using a little of the lazy task-swapping
> code that will fail under a Rev. R with RO4.
Good God ! If you're intending to code, you can simply read some
processor status register (register 0, copro 15 ?) to give you the
processor product code and revision
No need for complicated indirect tests !
> AFAIR Rev R. is harmless to RO3.7, but
> hammers proper multi-tasking operating systems because
> of the bug: RO4 moves closer to a 'proper' OS, and so gets hit.
:-))))
I think it's got very little to do with multitasking, more with
virtual memory. You see, 'proper systems' use VM and mark
pages that are paged out 'invalid'. This combined with some
'bad' instructions on the end of the previous page
can trigger the bug.
If 'lazy task swapping' works as I think it does it also
marks (normally valid) page descriptors as invalid, though
for a different reason. The problem could also appear much
more often than with RiscBSD / virtual memory.
Kind regards,
--
Thomas Boroske
Darren Salt
cc...@zeus.bris.ac.uk (John P Baker) wrote:
> Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | nr. Ashington, | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| Risc PC, Spectrum +3, | Northumberland | ds@zap,uk,eu,org
| A3010, BBC Master 128 | Toon Army | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk
| ChrEd. AppSquash. BlockSize. Decoders. FontMsgs.
If enough data is collected, anything may be proven by statistics.
John P Baker
>In article <F3Inv...@fsa.bris.ac.uk>,
>> Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
>
>
MRC CP15,0,R1,C0,C0 (in SVC mode?)
mine gives &4401A103 = StrongArm Rev 3
nhoJ
Jonathan Duddington
Darren Salt <ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk> wrote:
> > Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
> DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
I tried that and it gave:
4401A102
Is that correct? What does it mean?
--
Demo version of !Speak from: http://www.argonet.co.uk/users/jsd
Jon Duddington j...@argonet.co.uk
Coventry, England. Speech synthesis for Acorn RiscOS computers
Richard Wilson
>
> > Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
>
> DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
What a waste of memory! ;-)
Richard.
Andy Carter
Jonathan Duddington <j...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <48B040DD30%ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk>,
> > > Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
> > DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
> I tried that and it gave:
> 4401A102
> Is that correct? What does it mean?
That's what I got. I think it's a rev. 2... same as ArmSi gives here too
:-/
Peter Bell
Jonathan Duddington <j...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <48B040DD30%ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk>,
> Darren Salt <ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk> wrote:
>
> > > Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
>
> > DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
>
> I tried that and it gave:
> 4401A102
>
> Is that correct? What does it mean?
Yes, something like:
bits 31 to 24 = &44 = 'D' Designer code (D = Digitial)
bits 23 to 12 = &01A = 0,1,10 Processor type ( = 110)
bits 11 to 4 = &10 Don't know
bits 3 to 0 = &02 = 2 Revision number 2
I'm not sure how the revision numbers relate to the rev letters which
are stamped on the top of the chip.
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Bell - pe...@foursqre.demon.co.uk - FourSquare Computing Ltd
5 Drome Path, Winnersh, Wokingham, Berkshire RG41 5HB, UK.
Tel. +44 (0) 118 989 0982 Fax. +44 (0) 118 979 4639
Richard Sargeant
[ MRC CP15,0,R0,C0,C0 ; ARM3 ID -- reported as &41560300 for me]
> DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
Since ric...@wilsontigger.demon.co.uk said that wasted memory...
DIMP%16:[OPT2:.C%MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
^
Insert a SPACE there for better readability if OPT changed to 3.
--
Richard, wondering if anyone has reported that feature to Acorn.
Anti-UCE address: Sargeant at arcade dot demon period co period uk
Please translate this Anti-UCE address for private replies - thank you.
--
___ ___ ___ ___ ___ ___ | Free Internet E-mail and Usenet News |
| / \/ \/ \/ \/ \/ \ | +44 181 654 2212 also +44 181 655 4412 |
| A R C A D E | Croydon UK - Fidonet#2:254/27.0 |
| The Definitive Acorn BBS | http://arcade.demon.co.uk at weekends |
Richard Sargeant
> > DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
>
> I tried that and it gave:
> 4401A102
IIRC, the most significant byte is an ASCII code for the manufacturer of
the CPU. A is for ARM, and D is for Digital... Intel inside, anyone?
--
Richard.
Darren Salt
Richard Wilson <ric...@wilsontigger.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <48B040DD30%ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk>, Darren Salt
> <URL:mailto:ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk> wrote:
>> In message <F3Inv...@fsa.bris.ac.uk>
>> cc...@zeus.bris.ac.uk (John P Baker) wrote:
>>> Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
>> DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
> ^^^
> What a waste of memory! ;-)
Well at least it's only 240 bytes, not 240MB... ;-)
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | nr. Ashington, | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk
| Risc PC, Spectrum +3, | Northumberland | ds@zap,uk,eu,org
| A3010, BBC Master 128 | Toon Army | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk
| ChrEd. AppSquash. BlockSize. Decoders. FontMsgs.
Quantised Revision of Murphy's Law: Everything goes wrong all at once.
Darren Salt
Peter Bell <pe...@foursqre.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <48b060...@argonet.co.uk>
> Jonathan Duddington <j...@argonet.co.uk> wrote:
>> In article <48B040DD30%ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk>,
>> Darren Salt <ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk> wrote:
>>>> Don't you just have to read the StrongArm's Internal register 0?
>>> DIMC%256:P%=C%:[OPT2:MOV1,14:SWI22:&&EE100F10:MOVSPC,1:]PRINT~USRC%
>> I tried that and it gave:
>> 4401A102
>> Is that correct? What does it mean?
> Yes, something like:
> bits 31 to 24 = &44 = 'D' Designer code (D = Digitial)
And 'A' = Acorn.
> bits 23 to 12 = &01A = 0,1,10 Processor type ( = 110)
> bits 11 to 4 = &10 Don't know
Explain &00710 :-)
> bits 3 to 0 = &02 = 2 Revision number 2
> I'm not sure how the revision numbers relate to the rev letters which
> are stamped on the top of the chip.
Probably something to do with those actually released...
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| Risc PC, Spectrum +3, | ds@zap,uk,eu,org | Northumberland
| A3010, BBC Master 128 | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk | Toon Army
| <URL:http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/> (PGP key here)
A committee has six or more legs and no brain.
Peter Bell
Darren Salt <ne...@youmustbejoking.demon.com.uk> wrote:
> In message <c8c9b2b048%pe...@RiscPC01.winnersh.foursqre.demon.co.uk>
> Peter Bell <pe...@foursqre.demon.co.uk> wrote:
[Re: interpretation of SA Processor ID register]
> > bits 23 to 12 = &01A = 0,1,10 Processor type ( = 110)
> > bits 11 to 4 = &10 Don't know
>
> Explain &00710 :-)
Yes. Unfortunately there have been (at least) three definitions of
the ID register. The first was that used in the ARM3 (and ARM2a as
used in the A3010 etc). Then the ARM6 and later had a slightly
different definition. Then it changed, yet again, with the SA.
Matthew Bullock
<URL:mailto:nos...@somewhere.co.uk> wrote:
> In article <c8c9b2b048%pe...@RiscPC01.winnersh.foursqre.demon.co.uk>,
> Peter Bell <pe...@foursqre.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> > bits 31 to 24 = &44 = 'D' Designer code (D = Digitial)
> > bits 11 to 4 = &10 Don't know
>
>
> Incidentally, ArmSI does also tell me this - sorry for previously saying
> it didn't report the chip revision. I must have looked at it once,
> expecting a letter & got confused or some such...
>
> > I'm not sure how the revision numbers relate to the rev letters which
> > are stamped on the top of the chip.
>
>
> S'pose knowing what bits 4-11 flag would also be nice :)
The actual meaning of the ID register (from the ARM610 onwards) are:
bits 31-24 -> Designer code (an ASCII letter, either 'A' or 'D' ATM)
bits 23-16 -> Manufacturer code (I can't find a list of who is which
code though)
bits 15-4 -> Processor type (i.e. &A10 for SA)
bits 3-0 -> Revision number
On the ARM3 it was defined slightly differently with the bottom 8 bits
for the revision number and only 8 bits for the processor type.
Matthew
--
Matthew Bullock
http://dialspace.dial.pipex.com/matthew.bullock/
Hedley Hunnisett
What hope for Risc OS 4 ?) saying:
MB> The actual meaning of the ID register (from the ARM610 onwards) are:
<snip>
MB> -> Revision number
So, going back to the original enquiry, what number would revision T have,
please? Seeing that 3 is the highest number on offer so far, it seems a long
way away from letter T!
--
Hedley Hunnisett of Wigston Magna, Leicestershire, England
hed...@arcticbb.demon.co.uk
*** !DigiMail 1.4.6 (28-Mar-1998) - The Acorn BBS OLR ***
Anti-UCE address: hedleyh at arcticbb dot demon period co period uk
Please translate this Anti-UCE address for private replies - thank you.
--
Darren Salt
address...@nospam.demon.co.uk (Hedley Hunnisett) wrote:
> On 08 December 1998, Matthew Bullock wrote about StrongArm revision (was
> Re: What hope for Risc OS 4 ?) saying:
>> The actual meaning of the ID register (from the ARM610 onwards) are:
> <snip>
>> -> Revision number
> So, going back to the original enquiry, what number would revision T have,
> please? Seeing that 3 is the highest number on offer so far, it seems a
> long way away from letter T!
I'm crossposting this to comp.sys.arm in the hope that somebody there knows.
Whether they crosspost the answer isn't my problem :-)
--
| Darren Salt anti-UCE | ds@youmustbejoking,demon,co,uk | nr. Ashington,
| Risc PC, Spectrum +3, | ds@zap,uk,eu,org | Northumberland
| A3010, BBC Master 128 | arcsalt@spuddy,mew,co,uk | Toon Army
| Let's keep the pound sterling
"I didn't think he could live down to his reputation, but he did."