More progress on MSX Fuzix

Page 2/4
1 | | 3 | 4

By geijoenr

Expert (93)

geijoenr's picture

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.-

By nataliapc

Resident (63)

nataliapc's picture

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?

By Grauw

Ascended (8507)

Grauw's picture

31-07-2017, 16:20

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

By Manuel

Ascended (15804)

Manuel's picture

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.

By geijoenr

Expert (93)

geijoenr's picture

01-08-2017, 08:37

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

By nataliapc

Resident (63)

nataliapc's picture

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?

By Manuel

Ascended (15804)

Manuel's picture

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.

By geijoenr

Expert (93)

geijoenr's picture

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.

By Giangiacomo Zaffini 2

Master (167)

Giangiacomo Zaffini 2's picture

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.

By Giangiacomo Zaffini 2

Master (167)

Giangiacomo Zaffini 2's picture

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