Subject: Re: how fast^H^H^H^Hslow?
To: None <>
From: gabriel rosenkoetter <>
List: port-next68k
Date: 06/04/2002 01:46:50
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Tue, May 21, 2002 at 02:22:25AM -0400, John Klos wrote:
> But last I checked, the Turbos don't run NetBSD. Or do they? Please tell
> me they do now!

To the best of my knowledge anyway, that's still true, but there's a
nice, shiny turbocube sitting to my left taunting for time and spare
disk (wouldn't want to blow away my clean NeXTStep 3 install!) to
work on it. In any case, NeXTStep is quite useable on that machine
(though I wouldn't dream of letting its vaguely 4.2BSD TCP/IP stack
outside of my firewall).

Fwiw, I also have an 030 cube I'd be willing to lend to someone with
development time but no hardware. (There's no attached monitor,
unless you want to take my second head from the turbocube and give
me a soundbox to use. All loans, of course. I want both cubes in the
long run. :^>)

I'm vaguely more interested in playing with PowerPC 601 support on
a PowerMac 7200 motherboard a little further down the workbench,
though... ;^>

> Well, to give you a rough idea, a 40 MHz 68040 Macintosh (with pseudo-DMA
> SCSI) takes somewhere between 32 and 40 hours depending on whether the
> compiler is already 68040 optimised or not.

=2E.. and DMA support should be getting better on mac68k vaguely soon,
especially on the AV models. Don't know how much of that is
stealable by next68k, though.

gabriel rosenkoetter

Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (NetBSD)