MorphOS for AmigaONE

[downix]

Last time I checked U-Boot was OpenSource...

OpenSource doesn't mean it's non-proprietory.  All it means is that it's open-source.  Can you find uBoot on other retail-box PPC machines?  Nope.  While it might be open source, it is also a proprietory, that is it does not follow any of the established PowerPC conventions (PREP, CHRP nor POP).

[downix]

Afaik U-Boot is GPL and supports other cpus too (like ARM)

Doesn't make it a standard now, does it?

There are 3 clearly established PowerPC platforms, PREP, CHRP and POP.  Anything outside of those are, by definition, proprietory.  The Pegasos is a CHRP machine, an open standard platform.  The AmigaONE is not PREP, CHRP nor POP, it is Mai's proprietory design, only differing from CHRP by it's boot-ROM, in this case the open-source uBoot.

[HyperionMP]

Sorry Nate but first you are going on about U-Boot being proprietary.

This was clearly wrong as the definition of the word "proprietary" means that it is a specific entity's property.

GPL'ed software by definition cannot be proprietary as the GPL license puts the code in the public domain.

So you suddenly reverse course and claim that it's the actual Mai hardware that is proprietary.

This is again wrong unless the design were protected by some kind of intellectual or industrial property right which it clearly is not.

Anybody can copy the Mai motherboard.

You would ofcourse need proprietary chipsets like the Articia S and the VIA unless you choose to develop your own replacements.

Bottom-line is: the Pegasos design is no more proprietary or less proprietary than the Mai motherboard.

The fact that it adheres or not to a "standard" like POP etc. doesn't change that one bit.

Unless you are suggesting you can build a POP board without using proprietary CPU's and chipsets.

[downix]

@HyperionMP

http://playground.sun.com/pub/p1275/

Read up before you open your mouth again and have to insert your foot.

The IEEE 1275 booting mechanism used by the Pegasos (commonly called Open Firmware with the implimentation used by the Pegasos called Smart Firmware) is an industry standard system originally proposed by Sun Microsystems and Apple Computers, and used by millions of machines in the US alone.  

In other words, it's not proprietory.

Now, yours and others claim is that if the system uses GPL software, it is non-proprietory.  Well then, please feel free to rebuttal my arguement:

TiVO

A clearly proprietory system, running GPL'd software.  

So deal with it, the AmigaONE is a proprietory system based on a non-standard BIOS while the Pegasos is a CHRP platform using the IEEE-1275 Open Firmware based boot system.  And what's the difference, really?

The boot ROM.

[Merko]

Ben, you can argue all you want. But the fact is that OpenFirmware is
a standard that runs on PPC machines from more than one manufacturer.
U-boot does not, despite its open source status.

What this means, is simply that something made to run with
OpenFirmware can easily be ported to other hardware that runs
OpenFirmware. Meanwhile, something made for U-boot can easily be
ported to other hardware that uses U-boot.. well.. except that no
such hardware exists.

[downix]

@olegil

Don't know what Open Firmware is?  Glad you asked.

Open Firmware, also known as IEEE-1275, is an industry standard firmware, that is ROM-based booting system, used by hundreds of manufacturers worldwide to support SPARC, PowerPC, MIPS, 68k, Coldfire, ARM, PA-RISC, Alpha as well as other lesser-known processors.  The root of the system is the programming language FORTH, well known for it's performance and CPU-agnostic approach to handling tasks.  

Sun has good documentation on Open Firmware at:  http://playground.sun.com/pub/p1275/

Using the public documentation, one should be able to program any drivers needed to make their hardware "Open Firmware compatable."  

The IEEE-1275 implimentation used by the Pegasos is called Smart Firmware, and is made availible from Codegen, Inc. a world-renouned supplier of Open Firmware for 3rd party platforms.  (Apple, Sun as well as others use their own implimentations)

Any other questions?

[downix]

@HyperionMP

GPL'd software itself can be used as proprietory, as TiVO shows.  This is the case in the AmigaONE.  While sure, anyone can download Linux and run it on their machines, it doesn't allow them to run the TiVO's special software, does it?  Just because someone can install uBoot doesn't mean that suddenly they can run AmigaOS4 now, does it?

[Darth_X]

HyperionMP wrote:
I should also add that we NEVER received an offer from Genesi to obtain the full documentation of the Pegasos hardware including chipsets and firmware documentation.

Idiotic offers to come and pick up the hardware in Paris aside, this is exactly what is needed to even contemplate a port of OS 4 to the Pegasos I.

I don't think the offer of come to paris to pick up the hardware is idiotic.  This is part of business.

Why do you want to assume this to be idiotic?

No hardware modifications are required incidentally, just access to the firmware.

Having said that, given the fact that there are at best only 600 Pegasos I machines out there and far fewer actually sold, it's hardly worth the effort.

The Pegasos I is a discontinued product which has no future and a permanently fixed userbase.

The majority of the first run Pegasos boards out there are in the hands of developers & power users. These are the people preparing the way for the second generation or second run pegasos, which looks to be produced in a much larger volume.

Can you say that there are 600+ AmigaOnes running OS4 in the hands of developers? Probably not... but if there was  then the OS4 would be a much stronger platform to develop for, right?

As it is, I don't see how selling 600 AmigaOne's running Linux to end users would be of benefit to Hyperion or the users themselves.
 
By the time OS4 ships, the AmigaOne's will drop in price to 200Euros or less, right? :-D

[downix]

Ya know, I really feel like showing off my full nerdiness tonight.

Ben Hermans, you want full docs on how to port your OS to a CHRP platform, then let's start at the source:

PowerPC(tm) Microprocessor Common Hardware Reference Platform: A System Architecture
ISBN 1-55860-394-8
Published by Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc.

they can be reached at:
1-415-392-2665

In addition, it can also be obtained from IBM at:
+39-39-600-4455

Please refer to the above documentation for full understanding of the CHRP bindings for the IEEE-1275-1994 Open Firmware.

[downix]

Ya know, Ben Hermans, ya really got me to thinking.

So here is the answer to your problems:

http://www.openbios.info/

An open-source implimentation of Open Firmware.  While under-finished, it is no more underfinished than PPCBoot was when you started.

[uncharted]

Number of points to pick up on.

1. How comes Ben has to go to Paris to collect a board when Genesi will ship to any other developer anywhere in the world?

2. If Bill is so desperate to get AOS on board, why doesn't he just send them the fricking board and docs, rather than you guys piss and moan about "them" not accepting your offers.

3. Let's be honest here, a large part of the reason that there is no co-operation is not to do with licencing, dongles etc. It's the reason why here in July 2003 the classic Amiga scene is so bad, and that is the oversized egos of certain developers.

4. How is urguing about what's proprietry and what isn't helping the situation?

All I see here is the same people comming out with the same old crap.  Pull your heads out of your own arses for 5 seconds and see exactly what has been achieved in the last 5 years aside from olympic standard finger-pointing

[downix]

@uncharted

the original offer was to send it to Hyperion IIRC.  After being rebuffed, it's been reduced to either a) coming to paris or b) Ben Hermans showing up at one of the Amiga shows and bbrv handing it over in-person.

But you are right, the major issue is that of ego.  The "My way is the right way" attitude of the Amiga community in general.

And without that ego, there wouldn't be an Amiga community at all, it is what defines us.

[uncharted]

downix wrote:
@uncharted

the original offer was to send it to Hyperion IIRC.  After being rebuffed, it's been reduced to either a) coming to paris or b) Ben Hermans showing up at one of the Amiga shows and bbrv handing it over in-person.

I'm sure Ben would say differently. TBH I can't be arsed to work out who's telling the truth, there should be no need.

But you are right, the major issue is that of ego.  The "My way is the right way" attitude of the Amiga community in general.

And without that ego, there wouldn't be an Amiga community at all, it is what defines us.

I'm not talking about general zelotry here, but rather those with the ability to do something (software developers, business men, hardware designers), whose egos have been and still are blocking progress.  So much has happened becuase of an individual or group, putting thier own selves pride and arrogance in front of that of technological, market and community progress.

Ultimately the community is left to kiss butt, stroke egos and fight it out amoungst themselves.

[HyperionMP]

You are still very much wrong Nate.

It is clear that GPL'ed software like U-Boot is not capable of being owned by anybody on the basis of the GPL license alone.

I'm sure you are not denying it.

Can one builld proprietary hardware using GPl'ed software?

Sure. But that would imply that the proprietary nature of the hardware design and of the design alone (e.g. protected by a patent) would give rise to its proprietary nature.

This is not the case for the Mai motherboards.

Neither the hardware nor the firmware is proprietary in this case.

With respect to Open Firmware:

First of all, the IEEE standard was withdrawn. It is in fact no longer an IEEE standard.

Take a look at:

http://www.openfirmware.org/

"The IEEE-1275 Open Firmware standard was not reaffirmed by the OFWG and has been officially withdrawn by IEEE. Unfortunately, this means it is unavailable from the IEEE. "

Has this any impact on its proprietary nature?

No.

A "standard" and/or its implementation can be completely proprietary.

Companies developing firmware on the basis of the Openfirmware "standard" are developing proprietary software because that specific implementation is protected by copyright.

I am not allowed to strip out a Mac's firmware or the Pegasos's OF rom and distribute it because that is a violation of copyright law.

Hence, while something might well be an "open" standard (ie in the public domain), the actual implementation of that open standard is nearly always proprietary i.e. protected by copyright law.

Not so for U-Boot which is GPL'ed.

[HyperionMP]

We don't need a "free" Pegasos, we are capable of obtaining one ourselves.

In fact, no less than 3 OS 4 developers have a Pegasos.

What we would really need is full disclosure of the hardware documentation (all chipsets) and of the firmware including the ability to reflash the rom.

There was NEVER an offer on the table for that.

The hardware by itself is useless.

[HyperionMP]

Not if that were finished, it would indeed be a non-proprietary implementation of Openfirmware.

And we have been aware of that project for some time.

Don't forget that the original Teron boards used a proprietary OF Rom developed by Softex.

Mai didn't feel like continuing with more proprietary firmware so they chose PPCBoot instead which they could freely adapt and copy themselves.

So we did look into that open source project at the time but its state was very much unsuitable for our purpose.

U-Boot is in fact used by tons of embedded system hardware using a variety of different CPU's like PPC and StrongArm/X-Scale.

Why?

Because if they went for OF instead, they would have to hire a company to adapt its proprietary OF implementation to a specific piece of hardware.

No such problems with U-Boot.

You can either adapt it to your own hardware or hire somebody else to do it.

Either way, you'll get full disclosure of the source-code and are free to copy and adapt it.