[Coco] Back to os9level 2

L. Curtis Boyle curtisboyle at sasktel.net
Wed Apr 29 15:32:36 EDT 2020 

I don’t know what has all changed acia driver wise, but system calls are mostly the same (there are new added ones, bug fixes, and a few with added capability that are backwards compatible), so you should be fine there. 

Sent from my iPhone

> On Apr 29, 2020, at 8:43 AM, phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> The question is since Ribbs depends on old stuff t2, run and syscall what
> has changed. Are you the syscalls in NItroos9 the same as the old Tandy Os9
> Level 2? Have any of the memory address call changed from the old ones?
> Ribbs use the old syscall from tandy Os9level 2 to determine the file size.
> These just examples.
> 
> PROCEDURE useredit
> (* Written by Ron Bihler
> (* Expanded for v2.10 by Charles R. West
> TYPE taddress=ta1,ta2,ta3,ta4,ta5:INTEGER
> TYPE address=ad1a,ad1b:BYTE; ad2,ad3,ad4,local:INTEGER
> DIM la:address
> TYPE registers=cc,aa,bb,dp:BYTE; lx,ly,lu:INTEGER
> DIM reg:registers
> DIM b,lof,huser,mult:REAL
> 
> ON ERROR GOTO 100
> OPEN #path,filename:UPDATE
> 5
> reg.aa=path
> callcode=$8D
> reg.bb=2
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> IF reg.lu<0 THEN lof=reg.lu+65536.
> ELSE
> 
> Watchcd
> 
> PRINT "Outside program '"+filename+"' running."
> callcode:=$8D \(* I$Getstt *)
> reg.a:=la.ad1 \(* Path to Modem *)
> reg.b:=0 \(* SS.Opt *)
> reg.lx:=ADDR(packet) \(* Address to store packet *)
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> 
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg) \(* Save the changes *)
> REM Dup Standard Paths so that they can be reopened later
> reg.a:=0
> callcode:=$82 \(* I$Dup *)
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> stin:=reg.a
> reg.a:=1
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> stout:=reg.a
> reg.a:=2
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> sterr:=reg.a
> REM Close Standard Paths
> reg.a:=0
> callcode:=$8F \(* I$Close *)
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> reg.a:=1
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> reg.a:=2
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> reg.a:=la.ad1
> callcode:=$82 \(* I$Dup *)
> RUN syscall(callcode,reg)
> nwin:=reg.a
> 
> If the developer changed something its better to use a different filename
> and leave the old stuff alone so it does not break of the older programs.
> 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> 
>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 9:39 AM Alex Evans <varmfskii at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> Since we are largely talking about utilities, you could probably get
>> away with using the NitrOS9 (6809) versions of them which have already
>> been patched.
>> .
>> 
>>> On Wed, Apr 29, 2020 at 8:49 AM phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>> It looks like a lot patching has be done. The date in the code is using 8
>>> characters for the date, so I will be look at the issue due to the FTN
>>> standards.
>>> 
>>> <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>> 
>>> Virus-free.
>>> www.avast.com
>>> <
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>> 
>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 9:56 PM Alex Evans <varmfskii at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> 
>>>> If you use a patched setime command, you can correctly set the date.
>>>> 
>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020, 17:07 phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> Thanks. Can you please provide me with a example to set and get the
>>>> current
>>>>> date and time? Will it show the correct date for example 2020/04/28
>>>>> 17:06:00?
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> <
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>>>>> 
>>>>> Virus-free.
>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>> <
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>>>>> 
>>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 4:34 PM Rick Ulland <rickulland1 at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>>> Important to note the time display is not the clock. The actual
>> clock
>>>>>> uses a one byte value for year,and the OS9 system read and set
>> calls
>>>>>> F$STime and F$Time deal with the correct number. Hardware clocks
>> all?
>>>>>> worked by setting the software clock using the (good) OS9 system
>> calls,
>>>>>> if the drive did the year as math, things might just work. I
>> remember
>>>> my
>>>>>> Dallas RTC kept going and I was not running Nitros9.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> Two big bugs in 2.0.1:
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The 'date' command should display (1900 + clock year), but it
>> doesn't
>>>> do
>>>>>> the math, it prints a fixed string "19" then the clock year. Data
>> is
>>>>>> fine, but looks weird.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> The 'setime' utility ignores the problem by only accepting 2
>> digits for
>>>>>> a 1 byte value. If you don't have a hardware clock, no way to set
>> the
>>>>> year.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> If these two utility programs were tweaked, you would be good until
>>>>>> 2154. This must have been done by somebody. I'll poke around here.
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> -ricku
>>>>>> CoNect
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> On 4/28/20 8:22 AM, phil pt wrote:
>>>>>>> 'The correct format is yyy-mm-dd hh:mm:ss
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> Virus-free.
>>>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>>>> <
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>> On Tue, Apr 28, 2020 at 8:58 AM Alex Evans <varmfskii at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> I'm not sure what you want to patch the clock to do. The way I
>> see
>>>> it
>>>>>>>> is that you can wither leave the clock alone and patch the
>> utilities
>>>>>>>> that misinterpret the system time, or patch the utilities that
>>>>>>>> misinterpret the system time. Now, the matter is different when
>> you
>>>>>>>> start talking about dealing with modules that support hardware
>> RTCs.
>>>>>>>> Look at it this way, the current clock module (60Hz, but I
>> assume
>>>> 50Hz
>>>>>>>> is the same) will roll over from 99-12-31 to 100-01-01 and would
>>>> store
>>>>>>>> the current year as 120 (the epoch is 1900). What do you think
>> the
>>>>>>>> system should store the current year as, and how do you intend
>> to
>>>>>>>> manage this by only patching the clock module?
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Apr 27, 2020 at 8:57 PM phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> I think the best way to resolve this issue is to patch the
>> clock on
>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> old
>>>>>>>>> Os9 Level 2 and use that. This way I do not have to make
>> several
>>>>>> hundred
>>>>>>>>> lines of changes in the code.
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>>>>>>>> Virus-free.
>>>>>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>>>>>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Apr 26, 2020 at 10:34 PM Bill Nobel <
>> b_nobel at hotmail.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Well to tell the truth the only place that exists nowadays is
>> in
>>>> the
>>>>>>>>>> original code.  Over time Clock got split between to modules.
>>>> First
>>>>>>>> being
>>>>>>>>>> the base, then the second became hardware specific for each
>> type.
>>>>>> I’ve
>>>>>>>>>> been getting it put back to one for the level3 mods from Allan
>>>>> DeKok.
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>> Sent from my iPad
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> On Apr 26, 2020, at 12:29 PM, phil pt <ptaylor2446 at gmail.com
>>> 
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Is there any patch to the clock on the old os9 level 2 so the
>>>> date
>>>>>>>> would
>>>>>>>>>>> work as yyyy/mm/dd Hr:mm:ss?
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> Thanks
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon
>>>>>>>>>>> Virus-free.
>>>>>>>>>>> www.avast.com
>>>>>>>>>>> <
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>> https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link
>>>>>>>>>>> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>>>>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>>>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> 
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>>> 
>>>>> 
>>>>> --
>>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>>> 
>>>> 
>>>> --
>>>> Coco mailing list
>>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>>>> 
>>> 
>>> --
>>> Coco mailing list
>>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> 
>> --
>> Coco mailing list
>> Coco at maltedmedia.com
>> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>> 
> 
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=icon>
> Virus-free.
> www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=webmail&utm_term=link>
> <#DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
> 
> -- 
> Coco mailing list
> Coco at maltedmedia.com
> https://pairlist5.pair.net/mailman/listinfo/coco
>

More information about the Coco mailing list