On Tue, 18 May 2010, Kolbj?rn Barmen wrote:
> However, the speed is not really that impressive yet
That is because they use FPGAs (cheap in small quantities, slow,
reprogrammable) and not ASICs (cheap in large quantities, fast, not
reprogrammable). The speed is actually better than the real th
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Finn Thain wrote:
Oops, this one flew under the radar...
> On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Kolbjørn Barmen wrote:
[snip]
> > Other than that - who wouldn't want Freescale to put out one last
> > bad-ass m68k for us all... ah *dreaming* :)
>
> I'd be happy with a synthesizable '040 co
On Mon, 26 Apr 2010, Kolbj?rn Barmen wrote:
>
> Other than that - who wouldn't want Freescale to put out one last
> bad-ass m68k for us all... ah *dreaming* :)
I'd be happy with a synthesizable '040 core. Free 68000 cores already
exist:
http://www.experiment-s.de/en/atari-ste-in-a-chip/
http
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Kolbjørn Barmen dixit:
>
> >Pardon my ignorance - what is m68080?
>
> An obvious typo for 68060… or a confusion between left and right hand
> while typing… whatever ☺
Ah, ok :)
I got a bit suspicious, since googling for m68080 actually put up some
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/25/2010 8:57 PM, fth...@telegraphics.com.au wrote:
>
> On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Gayle Lee Fairless wrote:
>
>> [68080] is a Motorola microprocessor chip typically found in Amiga
>> computers and others.
>
> Are you sure? I've never heard of such a
On Sun, 25 Apr 2010, Gayle Lee Fairless wrote:
> [68080] is a Motorola microprocessor chip typically found in Amiga
> computers and others.
Are you sure? I've never heard of such a device. Anyway, Linux supports
68020 with MMU, 68030, 68040 and 68060 processors. It also supports
Coldfire and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 4/25/2010 8:54 AM, Kolbjørn Barmen wrote:
> On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
>
>
> Pardon my ignorance - what is m68080?
>
> -- kolla
>
>
It is a Motorola microprocessor chip typically found in Amiga computers
and others. I have a
Kolbjørn Barmen dixit:
>Pardon my ignorance - what is m68080?
An obvious typo for 68060… or a confusion between left and right hand
while typing… whatever ☺
bye,
//mirabilos
--
FWIW, I'm quite impressed with mksh interactively. I thought it was much
*much* more bare bones. But it turns out it b
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> No, different thing. With multilib, it actually builds five variants
> of the libraries, one for each multiarch (-m68040 -m68080 -mfidoa and
> -mcpu32). I don’t think we need these, right now anyway.
Pardon my ignorance - what is m68080?
-- kolla
-
On Sat, 24 Apr 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> fth...@telegraphics.com.au dixit:
>
> >BTW, if it is still there, debian's "m68k-allow-gnu99" patch should be
> >removed before it causes problems.
>
> No. That one can only be removed once eglibc is in unstable, not before
> that. (At least from
fth...@telegraphics.com.au dixit:
>You said on launchpad, "libgfortran cannot be built multilib because one
>of the system includes contains inline assembly that is invalid with
>-mfidoa"
>
>Which makes me wonder whether you are referring to etch system includes?
No, etch has libc 2.3, I have
On Fri, 23 Apr 2010, Thorsten Glaser wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I wrote my findings here:
> https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/514579
You said on launchpad, "libgfortran cannot be built multilib because one
of the system includes contains inline assembly that is invalid with
-mfidoa
Hi,
I wrote my findings here:
https://bugs.launchpad.net/debian/+source/gcc-4.4/+bug/514579
Basically, libstdc++ misses a few symbols (defined in the .common
file, so I’m a tad wary about ignoring the error and continuing).
I’m now waiting for doko to no longer throw ENOTIME…
Build log is here:
13 matches
Mail list logo
