Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

26069Re: [midatlanticretro] Re: ROM Bootloader Issues

Expand Messages
  • Kyle Owen
    Jun 2, 2012
    • 0 Attachment
      Yeah, that particular machine has been listed...over and over and over! Which is no surprise, of course, judging by the price tag. I think it's just a very heavily modified 6800. Too modified for most of the purists out there, I guess. There was a 6800 that just recently sold for almost $800. Item number 150817895881. That is more than I expected it to go for, in fact, as maybe 6 months ago, a complete system sold for only $600 or so. I guess they're getting more desirable. 

      Kyle

      On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 9:12 PM, joshbensadon <no_reply@yahoogroups.com> wrote:
       

      Well, there you go, I guessed Z80 code... boy was I ever out in left field! I was thinking it was for your North Star.

      Hey, talking about SWTPC, there's one for sale on Ebay right now, but sale is not the word for it, they want near 4G's for it!
      It looks like it has three 3-1/2" drives on the right side?
      Can you explain that?



      --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, Kyle Owen <kylevowen@...> wrote:
      >
      > The code is 6800 (for my SWTPC 6800, in fact). I failed to include that in
      > my original email, duh! Sorry about that.
      >
      > PSHA will push the contents of accumulator A onto the stack and will then
      > decrease the SP by one. PULA will increase the SP by one and pull the byte
      > at the SP into accumulator A. Yeah, I got confused somewhere in there.
      >
      > DEX in the 6800 will only affect the zero flag, no others. I'm quite sure
      > of that. The other decrement operands (DEC, DECA, DECB) will affect the
      > negative, zero and overflow flags, however.
      >
      > My latest (working, even!) version is indeed using CPX. In fact, here's the
      > code: http://pastebin.com/VQFsPFqH
      >
      > 73,
      >
      > Kyle
      >
      > On Sat, Jun 2, 2012 at 7:06 PM, joshbensadon <no_reply@yahoogroups.com>wrote:
      >
      > > **

      > >
      > >
      > > Hi Kyle,
      > >
      > > I might be a little confused so excuse me if I'm in left field.
      > >
      > > Looking at your code, it looks like Z80 right?
      > > Doesn't the PUSH put 2 bytes on the stack? Accumulator and PSW??
      > > Further, the PUSH decrements the places the data.
      > > So, you should load the stack pointer with RAMEND+1 and after every push,
      > > you should INX SP.
      > >
      > >
      > > --- In midatlanticretro@yahoogroups.com, Kyle Owen <kylevowen@> wrote:
      > > >
      > > > Hi guys,
      > > >
      > > > So I recently copied 8k BASIC to (4) 2kB EEPROMs in hopes that I could
      > > make
      > > > a bootloader to copy the contents into RAM, eliminating the 5 minutes or
      > > so
      > > > that it would otherwise take to load BASIC via RS-232.
      > > >
      > > > Anyways, I'm completely stumped as to why my very simple bootloader isn't
      > > > working correctly. The code can be found here:
      > > http://pastebin.com/jbrTHdnX
      > > >
      > > > It actually does copy the contents correctly, but fails to exit to the
      > > > monitor on time. The DEX instruction can only update the zero flag, so I
      > > am
      > > > fairly limited on branches. It should exit the loop as soon as the index
      > > > register is zero, but instead, it exits well after the index register
      > > > underflows.
      > > >
      > > > Any help would be much appreciated, as always. Thanks!
      > > >
      > > > Kyle
      > > >
      > >
      > >
      > >
      >


    • Show all 9 messages in this topic