Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site lsuc.UUCP Path: utzoo!utcs!mnetor!lsuc!jimomura From: jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) Newsgroups: net.micro.amiga,net.micro.6809,net.micro.68k Subject: Re: Info on OS9 Operating System Message-ID: <812@lsuc.UUCP> Date: Sat, 28-Sep-85 18:07:47 EDT Article-I.D.: lsuc.812 Posted: Sat Sep 28 18:07:47 1985 Date-Received: Sat, 28-Sep-85 21:22:33 EDT References: <347@wlbr.UUCP> <2193@ukma.UUCP> <2198@ukma.UUCP> Reply-To: jimomura@lsuc.UUCP (Jim Omura) Organization: Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto Lines: 72 Xref: utcs net.micro.amiga:244 net.micro.6809:500 net.micro.68k:1154 Summary: Hopefully, my last word on OS-9 'here' In article <2198@ukma.UUCP> david@ukma.UUCP (David Herron, NPR Lover) writes: >In article <2193@ukma.UUCP> sean@ukma.UUCP (Sean Casey) writes: >>Flame on! >>... >>I realize that OS9 and SysV are different products. Their target markets are >>considerably different at the ends, but have a large overlap in the middle. >>If Microware wants a good share of that middle, they are going to have to give >>the developers a means to practically support the product. Otherwise, well, >>I told you so! > >Sean, Sean, Sean, please be careful, the last time you flamed you totally >melted a keyboard. And on your salary .... :-) > >Seriously... My experience with OS-9 (COCO) was that it was small enough >that one could disassemble it and stare at it for a few days and understand >it. In fact, the RS OS-9 manual set is almost good enough for that >understanding as is. (It documents the internal data structures and such >well enough that it's just a little thinking before you understand the >system). > >Maybe once you actually started using the code it acts different. (I've >not had much chance to play with it because I've only got one disk drive). > >I'm curious about one thing ... Does Microsoft distribute MSDOS source >code to developers? Or just some fancy documentation? > >What exactly does Microware distribute for OS-9 developers? >-- >--- David Herron >--- ARPA-> ukma!david@ANL-MCS.ARPA >--- UUCP-> {ucbvax,unmvax,boulder,oddjob}!anlams!ukma!david >--- {ihnp4,decvax,ucbvax}!cbosgd!ukma!david > >Hackin's in me blood. My mother was known as Miss Hacker before she married! Ummm. Guys, it'd be nice to have more Amiga stuff than OS-9 stuff 'here'. I *would* like to see OS-9 on Amiga and ST-520, but unless someone is going to say "I'm going to port OS-9 to the Amiga", I'd think most people would rather hear what the Amiga does. OS-9 has it's own net. Anyway, you don't need source to develop for OS-9. The only time you need source is when the system doesn't work as specified (a known flaw of *Unix* not OS-9 -- OS-9 works). The documentation available for OS-9 (full manuals cost $40.00 from Microware, so you can buy them and find out pretty much everything) is quite adequate. To quote the OS-9 Tech manual: "All system calls are executed via an SWI2 instruction. 1. Load the 6809 register with any appropriate parameters. 2. Execute a SWI2 instruction, followed immediately by a constant byte, which is the request code. 3. After OS-9 processes the call, it returns any param- eters in the 6809 register. If an error occurred, the C bit of the Condition Code Register is set, and Acc- umulator B contains the appropriate error code. This permits a BCS or BCC instruction immediately following the system call to branch on error/no error." Each call is documented with all the necessary information. And, no, Microsoft won't give you MS-DOS source-code either and yes, you can disassemble OS-9 modules and system calls *iff* you get a disassembler which is extra cost, but fairly cheaply had, especially from 2nd sources. -- James Omura, Barrister & Solicitor, Toronto ihnp4!utzoo!lsuc!jimomura