> So no progress [...]?

http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2014-March/thread.html

Edit:
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-02/threads.html#00317
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-03/threads.html#00001
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-03/threads.html#00224

Quote:

And the result is?

Sometimes you could provide an informative answer, not just hyperlinks.

It makes you look like a bot.

>> So no progress [...]?
>> http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2014-March/thread.html

> And the result is?

I don't know. You asked whether there's any progress on making MorphOS run under QEMU and I gave you a link where you can read up on it.

> Sometimes you could provide an informative answer

I've been giving you informative answers ad nauseam, but you more often than not just choose to ignore them.

> not just hyperlinks.

As I said, you can go out of your way and read everything for yourself.

> It makes you look like a bot.

I'm fine with that. But hey, don't be a lazy bum. Click my link and use your reading skills to inform yourself.

Quote:

I think there has been some cross-postings on this issue to the MorphOS Mailing List recently? Laire answered a few of the posts, not that I'm qualified to comment on any part of the discussion (it's all gibberish to me! )

Quote:

@vox:

The hyperlink given by Andreas was an exact answer to your question, whether there is any progress regarding MorphOS on QEMU. You should not blame him that he didn't interprete this progress (because he wasn't asked...) or even blame him that you can't interprete it.

Quote:

Then no answer was given, just link.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sG2OC574mkA

> no answer was given, just link.

And if you follow that link, which obviously is what it's there for, and go reading you'll get the answer, directly and without potential misinterpretation by a middleman.

>> So no progress [...]?

> http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2014-March/thread.html
>
> Edit:
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-02/threads.html#00317
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-03/threads.html#00001
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-03/threads.html#00224

Current status messages:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-04/msg00263.html
http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2014-April/008243.html

Update:

> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-04/msg00263.html
> http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2014-April/008243.html

There's progress being made:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-05/msg00258.html
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-05/msg00264.html

Update:

> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-05/msg00258.html
> http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-05/msg00264.html

http://www.openfirmware.info/pipermail/openbios/2014-June/008391.html

...and from a week ago:

"I think I've reached a milestone now. For the first time I was able to boot MorphOS and connect to it via VNC to also see it doing something."
http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-ppc/2014-06/msg00000.html

Interesting experiment.

So, perhaps QEMU is used as sandbox if CPU architecture is changed.

Quote:

This experiment was already completed in 2007.

Quote:

No.

> This experiment was already completed in 2007.

But you lost the source code to that QEMU modification, didn't you?

Quote:

No. I might have temporarily misplaced it at some point, but it's definitely not lost. But that doesn't matter anyway. The experiment was already completed in 2007, and no, Qemu won't be a base for anything MorphOS.

If there was a publicly available qemu modification to run MorphOS, there would be the potential for many more people to try the OS and find out what it is. If, out of those people, some mistook emulation inadequacies as MorphOS faults, they probably wouldn't pursue it any further - but would that be such a loss?

Quote:

Lets say a new sports car enters the market and all versions anyone sees before buying are limited to 10 km/h. Would you spend the money?

Geit

>> you lost the source code to that QEMU modification, didn't you?

> No. [...] it's definitely not lost.

So there has been some misunderstanding apparently. Thanks for clarification.

I'm not advocating that anyone spend time doing something that goes against their interests, least of all the MorphOS developers. I'm only asking because there's at least one person outside of the MorphOS developer team that has been actively attempting to get MorphOS running on qemu.

> QEMU Peg2 setup [...] could enable me to try MOS before MOS for SAM460ex

Speaking of Sam460:

https://github.com/mmuman/qemu/tree/sam460ex-WIP-rebasing
http://www.amiga.org/forums/showthread.php?p=804695

:-)

Quote:

That is interesting. More interesting than WinUAE at least.

Morphos on Qemu is a good thing but i doubt a such emulator will permit to use things like overlay 3d layers and tinygl apps. so as winuae it will not be so intersting.

Quote:

QEMU sports GPU passthrough so the emulated/virtualized OS can use the host GPU directly.

I don't like bursting anyone's bubble, but before you get your hopes too high up, I should mention that Qemu is really, really slow and a lot slower than most people think. Unless you're so nostalgic that you long for the performance of a 90s Amiga, then Qemu isn't really usable.

Quote:

Wait wait... what if we get a Core i12 and a bad ass GPU and and.. x86 is the way to go.. LOL

Quote:

That's a lie...

...you love bursting people's bubbles.

[ Edited by KennyR 06.03.2016 - 18:13 ]