Subject: Re: Performa 6200 upgrade path query
To: David A. Gatwood <dgatwood@deepspace.mklinux.org>
From: Roger Brown <rogerhb@xtra.co.nz>
List: port-macppc
Date: 06/22/2000 05:02:11
Let's see if I can help,

Apart from the Performa 6200 running 8.1, I have a 586 running Slackware 3.3
and a MacIIvx running NetBSD 1.4.2.

For the 6200 I have an external 500Mb SCSI drive which might be useful, as
well as internal 500Mb IDE.

Considering mklinux is a linux, would I be able to do cross compiles on the
586?

If so, what do I have to do to help?

I am very happy programming in C on UNIXes, know 68000 assembler, no PPC.
Knew to kernel programming, but I have done some device driver work on other
platforms.

Err, what's 'BAT'?

Regards,

Roger
----------
>From: "David A. Gatwood" <dgatwood@deepspace.mklinux.org>
>To: Yoshihisa Sugimoto <sugimoto@sums.shiga-med.ac.jp>
>Subject: Re: Performa 6200 upgrade path query
>Date: Wed, Jun 21, 2000, 12:15 pm
>

>On Wed, 21 Jun 2000, Yoshihisa Sugimoto wrote:
>
>> > > Considering the 6200 is currently unsupported by every known UN*X including
>> > > Darwin, is there a standard motherboard swap that can be done for the 6200?
>> > > (in order to run netbsd!!!)
>> >
>> >Hmm.  Maybe the 6360 motherboard?  Not sure, but worth a shot if you
>> >happen to find one.
>> >
>> 
>> Even if you find 6360/6400 logic boards, you have to add 3.3 volts power 
>> supply to work PCI based PPC603 logic board (Alchemy).
>
>Bummer.  Sounds like a pain in the backside.
>
>
>Well, maybe you 6200 users should give me and the other MkLinux folks a
>little help finishing getting MkLinux running on those machines.  There's
>a bug in the BAT handling that prevents it from getting started, but it
>should be very close to working once somebody gets past that.  :-)
>
>(I'm actually planning on working on this some this weekend, now that
>school's out for summer.)
>
>
>David
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>A brief Haiku:
>
>Microsoft is bad.
>It seems secure at first glance.
>Then you read your mail.
>