Re: Any real CP/M (86) development going on? - CP/M

This is a discussion on Re: Any real CP/M (86) development going on? - CP/M ; Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote: >I've noticed that people are actually working on projects like OpenDOS >enhancement and FreeDOS, and was wondering if there was anyone doing >any real maintainance work on CP/M these days? That is, is there >anything *new*-ish ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 2 of 2

Thread: Re: Any real CP/M (86) development going on?

  1. Re: Any real CP/M (86) development going on?




    Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:

    >I've noticed that people are actually working on projects like OpenDOS
    >enhancement and FreeDOS, and was wondering if there was anyone doing
    >any real maintainance work on CP/M these days? That is, is there
    >anything *new*-ish happening?


    There are three kinds of OS development that commonly occur:

    [1] Big commercial projects. These consist of the big boys such as
    Redhat Linux, Windows, and OS-X. No CP/M here...

    [3] Hobby projects. All it takes is one personwho is willing to put
    in the time to work on CP/M for the fun of it. Maybe that person
    is you?

    [3] Embedded systems. I have used portions of CP/M while developing
    Z80-based systems. Alas, embedded systems are invisible to the average
    person. Do you know whether your VCR or Ipod is running CP/M, QNX, etc.?

    --
    Guy Macon




  2. Re: Any real CP/M (86) development going on?

    Guy Macon writes:

    > Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson wrote:
    >
    >>I've noticed that people are actually working on projects like
    >>OpenDOS enhancement and FreeDOS, and was wondering if there was
    >>anyone doing any real maintainance work on CP/M these days? That
    >>is, is there anything *new*-ish happening?

    >
    > There are three kinds of OS development that commonly occur:
    >
    > [1] Big commercial projects. These consist of the big boys such as
    > Redhat Linux, Windows, and OS-X. No CP/M here...


    And probably can't get there, though I'm not sure under what licenses
    CP/M sources are.

    > [3] Hobby projects. All it takes is one personwho is willing to put
    > in the time to work on CP/M for the fun of it. Maybe that person is
    > you?


    No, at best, I'm only interested in application development for CP/M if:

    [A] People are still developing it, making new stuff and generally
    having fun This implies peple are putting features into CP/M one
    would expect of todays operating systems.

    [B] There is (pretty much) standard compliant C++ compiler out there
    for it. For what it's worth, I probably consider OpenWatcom standard
    compliant enough.

    > [3] Embedded systems. I have used portions of CP/M while developing
    > Z80-based systems. Alas, embedded systems are invisible to the
    > average person. Do you know whether your VCR or Ipod is running
    > CP/M, QNX, etc.?


    No, and generally, I don't care unless I want to program the device

    That said, I doubt I'll be interested in anything but 32bit (or more)
    applications, which I don't know will run on CP/M. There are DOS
    extenders, I know, but I know next to nothing about CP/M, except that
    it exists.


    Johann

    --
    johann myrkraverk com (you know the drill with the @ and .)
    I classify Outlook mail as spam, use something else.

+ Reply to Thread