in case you are interested to test new fpga accelerators for a600/a500

[ElPolloDiabl]

Could we stop going down the track of promising a 68k that will use modern software? It is distracting from current software releases.
  No one should develop software that will only run on a faster than 060 processor. A few games might be the exception.
  It is no longer fun when I am worrying about expansions and upgrades.

[alphadec]

Could we stop going down the track of promising a 68k that will use modern software? It is distracting from current software releases.
  No one should develop software that will only run on a faster than 060 processor. A few games might be the exception.
  It is no longer fun when I am worrying about expansions and upgrades.

What software releases are u talking about. ?

[kolla]

It would boot fine. I ran kickstart 3.0 from an a1200 on an a500 back in the day. Plus it would be trivial to load a different kickstart anyway. If you think the motherboard would get upset because the FPGA is emulating a 68000 rather than an 030/040/060, then how do you think it will know??

So because kickstart 3.0 works on an A500, a 68000 will work in an A1200? Brilliant logic.

[psxphill]

So because kickstart 3.0 works on an A500, a 68000 will work in an A1200? Brilliant logic.

It's the only problem you'd face, not insurmountable either as with an fpga you can jam in another rom and ignore the one on the motherboard.
 
 Assuming it won't work because of some magic that the a1200 will reject a cpu core that is only running 68000 instructions is insane.
 
 You're obviously trolling.

[kolla]

http://youtu.be/vLzhBGSyoCo

That video also gave the clear answer to my long lasting question - mac emulation is currently not working.

[kolla]

It's the only problem you'd face, not insurmountable either as with an fpga you can jam in another rom and ignore the one on the motherboard.
 
 Assuming it won't work because of some magic that the a1200 will reject a cpu core that is only running 68000 instructions is insane.
 
 You're obviously trolling.

Well, insane and trolling as I may be, but is it totally unthinkable that there is code in the kickstart and OS that may be confused by finding an AGA system with a 68000 CPU? What about A3000 and A4000 that also have Zorro III? I am curious if it would work.

[guest11527]

Well, insane and trolling as I may be, but is it totally unthinkable that there is code in the kickstart and OS that may be confused by finding an AGA system with a 68000 CPU? What about A3000 and A4000 that also have Zorro III? I am curious if it would work.

Actually, the kickstart bootstrap code is all more or less identical, and everything in it runs on a plain 68K. The kickstarts do not differ in how they were compiled or assembled, just in the way which modules they include. Depending on the machine, the scsi.device may be present or not (or rather, one out of the several scsi.devices), workbench.library might be absent, and so on. But modules were all compiled and/or assembled from the same sources with the same options, so CPU compatibility is at kickstart level not really the problem.

[kolla]

Yes, I know that everything in kickstart is plain 68000, that much is obvious having assembled my own kickstarts for 68000 systems. Even in OS3.9 there is very little that requires 68020+ (and that workbench.library for no obvious reason does so in a boingbag annoys me, and ditto for a few commands in C: and a few other places). I am more curious about code that may or may not be confused because of the oddball combination of 68000 CPU and AGA chipset. But, in time there will be an FPGA acc card for 1200 and it will be more obvious what works and what doesn't.