On 1 May 2001, John Fremlin wrote:

> David Brownlee <abs@netbsd.org> writes:
>
> > 	Would it be reasonable to make a GENERIC kernel to run on
> > 	psion5 + geofox + 5mx + psion7, or are they too dissimilar.
>
> Hmm. They do have the same instruction set and you could tell them
> apart so I suppose it would be possible but as no hardware components
> (well the 5mx has the same serial port as the 7) are shared it would
> be pretty pointless.
>
> > 	(Obviously it would make sense to also have customised kernels
> > 	for each)
> >
> > 	If a common GENERIC would not make sense, where would be the best
> > 	split?  psion5 + geofox, 5mx, hpcarm + psion7?
>
> I don't know where the Psion7/netBook falls. I'm only going for a 5mx
> port. (This port might also work on the 5mxPro and possibly the Revo,
> I'm not sure. The Linux people have started calling their port psion
> windemere which encompasses these three similar machines.)

	The hardware in an Acorn A410 and A5000 are pretty wildly
	different, but they share the same MMU design and (I believe)
	interrrupt handling, and some very similar support hardware so a
	common arm26 port makes sense.

	By that logic your 5mx, revo, revoPlus group makes a lot of sense
	(do you have any reference for the 5mxPro?)


		David/absolute		-- www.netbsd.org: No hype required --