More progress on MSX Fuzix

Page 2/4
1 | | 3 | 4

Par geijoenr

Master (204)

Portrait de geijoenr

05-07-2017, 08:01

Yes,
apart of the fact that the msx1 port in the source tree is different and doesn't use a mapper, there is no reason why the msx2 cannot be adapted to work on msx1 with a few changes.

E.-

Par nataliapc

Expert (93)

Portrait de nataliapc

31-07-2017, 13:33

Using MSX1 + MFR (512 RAM mapper + MSX-DOS 2/Nextor), the only difference is the 80 columns?

I guess that with MSX-DOS 1 the code also must use FCB instead of file handles, but using a MSX-DOS 2 compatible ROM the changes may be really minimal, right?

Par Grauw

Ascended (9566)

Portrait de Grauw

31-07-2017, 16:20

MSX-DOS2 (Nextor) works on MSX1. But does Fuzix even use it?

Par Manuel

Ascended (17460)

Portrait de Manuel

01-08-2017, 08:02

I doubt Fuzix relies on MSX-DOS or Nextor at all. After all, it's an OS, not an application for an OS.

Par geijoenr

Master (204)

Portrait de geijoenr

01-08-2017, 08:37

Fuzix is a complete OS, it does not even use the BIOS. Everything is built from scratch.

Par nataliapc

Expert (93)

Portrait de nataliapc

03-08-2017, 12:51

Ah ok... I din't known if it was just a layer (using ROM routines) or a full OS.

So, the main handicap to use the MSX2 version in a MSX1+RAM mapper is the VDP driver?

Par Manuel

Ascended (17460)

Portrait de Manuel

03-08-2017, 16:10

geijoenr wrote:

Fuzix is a complete OS, it does not even use the BIOS. Everything is built from scratch.

Wouldn't it actually make sense to use the BIOS for some things? Saves you from implementing support for dozens of different MSX models... the BIOS is very standardized, so if you use it properly, it may make life a bit easier to support all MSX models.

Par geijoenr

Master (204)

Portrait de geijoenr

04-08-2017, 17:49

Quote:

So, the main handicap to use the MSX2 version in a MSX1+RAM mapper is the VDP driver?

yes, pretty much.

Quote:

Wouldn't it actually make sense to use the BIOS for some things? Saves you from implementing support for dozens of different MSX models... the BIOS is very standardized, so if you use it properly, it may make life a bit easier to support all MSX models.

If you mean PHYDIO, I agree; is would just not be feasible to have Fuzix drivers for all models.

For the rest, there is no much point. The drivers for video, audio, or anything else are pretty simple when written in C, and the console (tty) support is so much better in Fuzix.

Par Giangiacomo Zaffini 2

Master (246)

Portrait de Giangiacomo Zaffini 2

21-11-2017, 02:05

Hi Geijoenr,

I have a MSX2+ with internal mapper upgraded to 512Kbytes of RAM, if I flash a megaROM with 64Kbyte Fuzix kernel You offer in Your google drive, and if I manage to copy a Z80 Root Filesystem (720kBytes) into a DDDS floppy (but how do I make it?) taken from Fuzix page , can I have Fuzix work on real hardware?
Does it make sense?
Thank You.

Par Giangiacomo Zaffini 2

Master (246)

Portrait de Giangiacomo Zaffini 2

06-12-2017, 10:19

Can a modern MSX peripheral like Rookie Drive be as good as MFR + SD for enabling Fuzix on MSX machines?
Twin question: is it feasible at all to bring Fuzix on MSX2/MSX2+/MSXturboR (any MSX with some amount of mapped RAM, for short) and a floppy drive?

Page 2/4
1 | | 3 | 4