Author Topic: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?  (Read 80936 times)

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2257
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #75 on: December 16, 2015, 04:20:49 PM »
Just make a call on MacRumors.

http://forums.macrumors.com/threads/any-one-want-to-help-build-a-community-made-os-9-3.1945040/

Quote
eyoungren

    I cannot begin to fathom the legal issues that may arise out of this.

    First and foremost there is the OS9 EULA. Then you're talking distribution of a copyrighted OS (I would assume this project is so not just the devs would be using it and that it would be provided free).

    It'd be one thing if Apple put OS9 in the public domain, but everything from 7.6.1 and up is not public domain.

    There are apps that modify certain things of course so you can get versions of OS9 on unsupported Macs. But those are apps and not code rewrite.

    I applaud the effort, but I don't see macos9lives existing for very long if this gets out. Lawsuits, Cease and Desist and takedown orders have a way of torpedoing things.

    Just my take…unless you tell me someone's found some legal loophole?
     

Quote
    Going by info I've seen in the past of such OS 7-9 projects it looks more like creating custom enablers & drivers to support newer hardware or add functions that a 3rd party program wasn't allowed under the original Apple Developer Connection terms.

    In my opinion its still a legal nightmare, ADC had strict toolbox access limitations for non-hardware developers and for example if someone had worked at Apple at any point in time could be in breach of employee knowledge--ReactOS was forced into a code audit by Microsoft when suspicions of insider knowledge due to certain frameworks being able to be installed for Internet Explorer 6.0 to work/run.

    Having said that, since I deal with OpenSource projects often I've been afraid to accept a job at Microsoft as off-the-clock work could be subject to employee side project audits.
     


Quote
Yeah, still not something I would touch even if I knew how to code.

Writing enablers for newer hardware is one thing. Aggregating it all together with the OS, advertising it as a new version build of that OS and then distributing it is just red meat for lawyers.

I could answer this guys at MacRumors, but my english skills won't make it justice.
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2257
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #76 on: December 16, 2015, 04:24:25 PM »
I reached Adam Albrec (artphotodude), author of Quicktime teatre for OS9, about his opinion on this.

Quote
    I have done a few things for OS9, but really I mostly develop for OSX like these:
    http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/ppc-media-center-watch-modern-internet-video-ppc-macs-running-104105

    http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/working-powerpc104-twitter-client

    http://macintoshgarden.org/games/doom-legacy-wad-launcher-0

    http://macintoshgarden.org/apps/burn-barrell-force-delete-app

    The biggest problems with OS9 is that its small 1.5GB of maximum ram allocation (including virtual memory), greatly hampers what can now be done on it, and as you have probably heard, the libraries for it are hopelessly behind.  Some libraries could be ported, but without even a good Python interpreter, the usefulness is very difficult to improve on.

    Besides every G3 will already run it, and most G4s will boot natively.  Never have cared for classic in OSX.    You BEST bet for doing what you suggest, would be to mod OSX to behave more like OS9.  It is far closer to current standards for design purposes.

Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline Custos

  • Veteran Member (100+ Posts)
  • ****
  • Posts: 125
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #77 on: December 16, 2015, 05:54:05 PM »
Your English is acually pretty damn good PT. Even just support for newer hardware would be a major leap for the community. We really need someone with good coding skills to write drivers for us. Maybe even donate money/hardware (
to test drivers)
 to a person capable of writing drivers
"A mistake is only an error. It only becomes a mistake when you fail to correct it."  -John Lennon

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #78 on: December 16, 2015, 07:34:58 PM »
I'm not really sure what to say here, other than
So let's not bill it as 9.3.  It's just third party patches to the system.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline Front 424

  • Enthusiast Member (25+ Posts)
  • ***
  • Posts: 61
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #79 on: December 17, 2015, 02:45:52 AM »
I'm not really sure what to say here, other than
So let's not bill it as 9.3.  It's just third party patches to the system.

I agree.  It's funny, but that numbering convention had been in the back of my mind.  "I wonder what would happen if OS 9.3 were announced?"  It's unfortunate there isn't at least an appreciation or sense of humor when big corp/big money is involved when it comes to long discontinued software AND hardware.
The above quoted persons concerning legality are something to be heeded, to a point.

But don't lose heart!

http://www.callapple.org/software/announcing-apple-iigs-system-6-0-2/

Old IIGS enthusiasts named their updated OS as the next version.  Allegedly another update is in the works.  Just thought I would mention that.

It would ultimately be nice to have a name for this aggregated effort and any extensions and patches as a collective install package.  Really it would.  Something that likeminded people could point to and say "If you want to get OS 9.2 working on X system, use the latest version of _____"

A really cocky name would be "OS 9 XLR8R"  ;)
Or OS 9 Extended or something. 

Damn the naming conventions! 

You've got the right idea, anyhow, and you have much support from us.  Best of luck with some of your prospective collaborators, like the OS Re project.  I've lost track of which thread that was in, but that seemed promising.

Closing thought.  Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a central thread, like a pinned topic where the several ongoing threads are located regarding getting os 9 going on later machines?  It's kind of spread out and I for one am a bit confused by all the different topics being scattered across multiple forum entries.  For example, there is one about the 1.5gb ram limit, but that is its own thread, and then there are several about about improving 9.2 as well as some relevant discussion in emulation topics.
Maybe I'm the only one losing track of all the intersecting discussions that all converge on this topic?

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #80 on: December 17, 2015, 07:29:07 AM »
Closing thought.  Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a central thread, like a pinned topic where the several ongoing threads are located regarding getting os 9 going on later machines?  It's kind of spread out and I for one am a bit confused by all the different topics being scattered across multiple forum entries.  For example, there is one about the 1.5gb ram limit, but that is its own thread, and then there are several about about improving 9.2 as well as some relevant discussion in emulation topics.
Maybe I'm the only one losing track of all the intersecting discussions that all converge on this topic?

I agree this would be useful. I've tried to put them where they are relevant, but I'm not always sure either.

Maybe a child board would be better as having a single thread with multiple topics get's kind of confusing too.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2257
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #81 on: December 17, 2015, 09:42:03 AM »
My reply on MacRumors:
Quote
Nanopico has said those will be third party patches to the system. You could consider addons to original 9.2.2 OS.

Quote
    First and foremost there is the OS9 EULA. Then you're talking distribution of a copyrighted OS (I would assume this project is so not just the devs would be using it and that it would be provided free).

The MacOS9Lives! page has been the best mirror for latest 9.2.2 OS for years without a single call from Apple. They are more worried about iPhones and iPads than on Obsolete hardware/software as all Macrumors PowerPC members know. They simply do not care a shit about MacOS9. They also do not care much about OSX PPC.

We have regular access to Apple Developer Conference (ADC) thru Internet Archive. It is more or less open. At least MacOS7 to 9 and most of MacOSX. No one has to be agree with the EULA to reach those documents.

Some topics we are sorting out:
The 2040 issue. http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2862.0
Mac OS 9 Development Requests (Application and Non-OS Level) http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2838.0
Mac OS 9 Development Requests (OS Level Items) http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2837.0
H264 codec, the "video game" is over in Mac Os 9. http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2403.0
MacOS 8&9 Devices doc. for drivers develop http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=1931.0
Mac OS 9.2.2 Maximum RAM and Real world observations http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2101.0
That post derived on
1.5GB Limit (some answers) http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2860.0

Closing thought.  Wouldn't it be a good idea to have a central thread, like a pinned topic where the several ongoing threads are located regarding getting os 9 going on later machines?  It's kind of spread out and I for one am a bit confused by all the different topics being scattered across multiple forum entries.  For example, there is one about the 1.5gb ram limit, but that is its own thread, and then there are several about about improving 9.2 as well as some relevant discussion in emulation topics.
Maybe I'm the only one losing track of all the intersecting discussions that all converge on this topic?

I agree this would be useful. I've tried to put them where they are relevant, but I'm not always sure either.

Maybe a child board would be better as having a single thread with multiple topics get's kind of confusing too.

Nanopico, this is your mother post. I think I have quoted every child post. Ask DieHard if he wants to make a child board for all those post on improving 9.2.2, But the H264 is in Codec childboard, others are on OS9 on unsupported hardware, etc. We are open to make changes if it is needed. Now this post is sticky for to be easy to find to everyone.

I guess, in the end, this Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3? post will be 3 times longer than Downgrade firmware of FW800 for OS9 comp. post, will have more of us understanding how OS9 works, some more help will come and we will achieve some things.

Thanks nanopico for your valuable time!
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #82 on: December 17, 2015, 11:08:01 AM »
Just an FYI,  with the holidays here I won't be doing much if any work with this for the next couple of weeks (in case any one comes looking for an update, don't expect one). But come January I will be going head first into this.  Hopefully I can get something at least interesting accomplished in the not too distant future.

As for the legal side of it (and trust me I'm no lawyer here), there is a part of me that just wan't to go straight to apple and ask for their blessing on this, but that may or may not be a good idea.  Probably won't happen, but it might amuse me for a few days after they say "nope, not going to happen"
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #83 on: January 04, 2016, 08:00:55 AM »
So the polls for development updates are now closed.
If you want to see where they ended here's two convenient links for you to look at.

http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2891.0
http://macos9lives.com/smforum/index.php?topic=2890.0

Thanks to those of you who voted.  This feedback is invaluable and really helps me establish the direction to go.

I'm currently trying to figure out the actual effort (how much time I still need to invest in research, design and coding) for the items.
Based on the votes and the effort I'll provide the things I will actually be tackling and in what order.

I've been reading all of Inside Macintosh (there is a lot of pages there) and I have to say the amount of API's documented in there, it would be possible for someone to re implement the entire system new (though that would be a massive effort with little return), but there is general documentation on how things like have been suggested would be implemented and enough documentation in of the individual areas to find the areas needing patching. 

More to come in 2016!!!!
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline mrhappy

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #84 on: January 04, 2016, 12:36:59 PM »

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #85 on: January 05, 2016, 11:41:02 AM »
I reached out to this guy to collaborate.  We'll see what happens.

last post on his site is from 2008. :)
"It is true that the "pre-emptive multitasking" advantage present in OS X can be illustrated by downloading CD-ROM ISOs and rendering chaos theory formulas while simultaneously instant messaging and posting on FaceBook what you ate... but in reality, what did you create?"
- DieHard, random forum troll at macos9lives.com

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #86 on: January 05, 2016, 12:05:56 PM »
I reached out to this guy to collaborate.  We'll see what happens.

last post on his site is from 2008. :)
Yeah I saw that too so I wasn't really holding out too much hope, but hey nothing gained if you don't try.  The only failures come from those who don't even try. (Or maybe that's just my opinion)
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #87 on: January 11, 2016, 11:36:58 AM »
Small tiny update. (I'm a bit busy right now so I haven't gotten a timeline of dev projects to update OS 9 yet).

Two notes.
One.
MacsBug loads early in the boot process (nothing new there), but looking through apple docs,  it loads in the upper part of RAM outside of that controlled by the process/memory managers.  This means that it is running in ram outside of the 1.5 GB limit! A normal program can't load up there and run correctly, but at least the OS is capable of addressing that memory and transferring control to something up there.

Two.
My assumptions on the boot process ( think I've listed them here before) are no longer assumptions/theories.  I found Apple documentation on the early boot process from open firmware to handing off to the nanokernel in the rom.
In case you don't feel like looking for my rambles from before, here is an overview of the boot process copied straight from Apple docs.

Quote
  • User presses power key. Between the time that the power key is pressed and the boot beep is heard, while the screen is still black, a ROM checksum is taken, the processor is checked, the interrupt controller is started, all the clocks are determined, the memory controller is initialized, NVRAM is checked, RAM is sized checked and initialized, and the L2 cache is sized and prepared (L2 cache is enabled in POST).
  • The POST code runs (preliminary diagnostics, boot beep, initialization, and setup). This is like similar code in an older Macintosh ROM, but it is different in that it does not contain code specific to an operating system.
  • Open Firmware initializes begins probing the hardware and the PCI bus to locate attached interfaces and hardware so that is can begin building the device tree.
  • Open Firmware loads the Mac OS ROM image file, based on defaults and the path settings found in NVRAM.
  • Open Firmware executes the Forth script in the bootinfo file, which contains information about the rest of the file and instructions to read both the Trampoline code and the Mac OS ROM file and place them into a temporary place in memory.
  • The Forth script transfers control to the Trampoline code, which functions as the transition between Open Firmware and the beginning of the Mac OS execution.
  • The Trampoline code gathers information about the system from Open Firmware, creates data structures based on this information, terminates Open Firmware, and moves the contents of memory to an interim location in physical memory space.
  • The Trampoline code transfers control to the Mac OS ROM initialization code.
A little more detail from the same set of documents
Quote
Here is a high-level view of the execution path taken when a NewWorld-based computer starts up.
  • The POST code runs (preliminary diagnostics, boot beep, initialization, and setup), with possible intervention in the mini nub, a small debugging tool.
  • Open Firmware initializes and begins execution, including building the device tree and the interrupt trees.
  • Open Firmware loads the Mac OS ROM file, based on defaults and NVRAM settings.
  • Open Firmware executes the Forth script in the Mac OS ROM file, which contains instructions to read both the Trampoline code and the compressed Mac OS ROM image and place them into a temporary place in memory.
  • The Forth script transfers control to the Trampoline code, which functions as the transition between Open Firmware and the beginning of the Mac OS execution.
  • The Trampoline code decompresses the Mac OS ROM image, gathers information about the system from Open Firmware, creates data structures based on this information, terminates Open Firmware, and rearranges the contents of memory to an interim location in physical memory space.
  • The Trampoline code transfers control to the HardwareInit routine in the Mac OS ROM bootinfo file.
  • The HardwareInit routine copies data structures to their correct places in memory, and then calls the NanoKernel.
  • The NanoKernel fills in its data structures and then calls the 68K emulator.
  • The 68K emulator initializes itself, then transfers control to the startup initialization code.
  • The startup initialization code begins execution, initializing data structures and managers, and booting the Mac OS.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2016, 11:53:04 AM by nanopico »
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline mrhappy

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1017
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #88 on: January 12, 2016, 01:34:14 AM »
Very interesting!!

Offline Jakl

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 323
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #89 on: January 12, 2016, 04:06:48 AM »
Sure is interesting!!

Offline Mat

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 434
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #90 on: January 12, 2016, 04:11:43 AM »
Hey nanopico, please keep up that good work! It is a joy to see you getting deeper and deeper into Mac OS 9! I hope you will find enough time this year to get some improvements up and running.
The entire posting about the boot process is very interresting.

This means that it is running in ram outside of the 1.5 GB limit! A normal program can't load up there and run correctly, but at least the OS is capable of addressing that memory and transferring control to something up there.
But that information is the most motivating one. I always hoped that making the additional memory (at least up to 2GB) available to the system itselve, at least as RAM- and Scratchdisk, more easily than for the programs. That would speed up several programs a lot.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #91 on: January 12, 2016, 11:24:15 AM »
Here's the update I promised earlier regarding what my specific goals on developments will be.
(here comes the broken record part where I regurgitate what I sort of said earlier)
The polls I posted were great for letting me know what people want and the results of that were factored into this.
My goals of what prompted me to start down this also weighed in.
The last factor was what I felt would be of benefit in a general sense.
So here they are with a little explanation with each.  They are listed in order that I will tackle them.

  • Support for G4 cpu's not currently supported (not machines but the actual G4 chip) without open firmware hacks. This can be added to the current work done to get unsupported machines working so that booting the entire G4 line will be easier.
  • Ram usage limits (the 1.5 GB ram limit).  Unlock the potential to utilize the most ram we can.  When implementing this I will attempt to just enable usage of all ram that is not used by the system. I will not put a limit to 2GB as if we ever get support for the G5's we will be able to use almost all of the 4GB the 32bit address space allows.
  • Right drivers/Enablers/Extensions to get all yet unsupported G4 machines running (including the mac mini/xserve). As part of this a few other items will come a long with it as I would like for all features of each machine to work.
    • Video card drivers.  As there are chips in the yet unsupported G4's then  updated video card drivers would be needed.  This part is the most likely to not succeed as there isn't any good source/documentation of the ISA's of the various cards.  Most cards should work without drivers, but won't have hardware acceleration.
    • USB 2.0 Support.  As there are G4's with USB2 ports this is a good place to also tackle USB2.  Initially I will attempt to get the built in chips working. Once that is done we can start testing third party cards and investigating them. Also of note is that any non-class compliant USB 2 devices will not have drivers and will more than likely not work at all.
    • USB Class Compliant Drivers.  Although Apple has some level of support for class complient devices, there will need to be some added, and some updated for USB 2. So this goes hand in hand with that.
    • FW800 Support. This will come with the G4 support as like USB2 there are G4 machines that have these ports.
  • 2040 Bug.  I had previously said I would attempt this one.  That is still the goal, but I have pushed it down on the priorities.  Changing the epoch would not be difficult, but file created on and modified dates would not be correct for files touched before the update was applied.  This could be an issue for several things (including sharing files and version tracking of files).  The other option I had was keeping track of when the value overflows, but again that would require changes possible to third party applications as well that are not aware of this and don't use the OS date/time functions. Still on the list though.
  • G5 Machine support.  The very early G5 revisions are the most likely to work (as they had PCI busses making less work to get up and going).  There are three hurdles to get the OS to even start booting.
    • U3 Drivers.  The drivers in Darwin are a good base and I have a pretty good idea where they need to be activated in the boot process.
    • AGP 8x support shouldn't require much work (because it's part of the U3 north bridge) as it's mostly just a faster version of AGP 4x.  They are both based on PCI and the north bridge pretty much just gives that bus a higher more dedicated priority.  Still there would likely need to be some changes made to make it work enough to boot. (The changes most likely will be part of the U3 Drivers).
    • The MMU.  I'm still trying to digest the full spec of the MMU in a 64bit PPC cpu.  From what I understand currently is that although the 64bit cpu is backwards compatible to 32bit ones, the MMU instructions are an exception. The MMU in 32bit cpus is a 32bit physical address, a 52bit translation register (you can't access that though) and 32bit virtual address space (this is what applications utilize).  The os sets up the mapping between virtual and phsyical address spaces (in the case of OS 9 there isn't any translation it's just a straight through mapping).  The G5 is 64bit straight through so all memory management functions of the 32bit os need to be updated to accomadate the 64bit addressing (this is why 32bit OS X on the G5 is able to access more than 4GB of ram with out PAE)

I didn't put this on the list as I don't know exactly where it would fit with in the order of other items, but I will be trying to write an H264 codec. I will be working on this early on, but I'm really not sure when this would be done.

To avoid as much legal issue as possible I am going to try to refrain from reverse engineering as much as I can.  I will be relying heavily on official Apple documentation and Darwin source code (as a basis to determine how to control various chips and the order to initialize them).

So timing.  I hope to have something to show/test for item one around April/May.  I know this is a ways out, but I have a full time job as a developer that some times requires upwards of 80 hours a week (though pretty rare for that) and I have a family. 

This list may change over time as I dig deeper into this and re-assess the feasibility/effort required for these items.

Finally just to reiterate what I have said before, I make no promises that I will accomplish any of this (as I am only one person) and any help testing or developing any one can provide is greatly appreciated.  A big thanks should go out to those who helped get the machines run that were previously unsupported, their work was a big inspiration for me to even consider this sort of project.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline DieHard

  • Administrator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #92 on: January 12, 2016, 12:40:15 PM »
I am sure many will consider even 1 item finished on the list an amazing feat. 

We can provide coffee and donuts (and maybe some movie tickets to get the kids/wife out of your hair) while you work on this important task.  Thanks, as always :)

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #93 on: January 12, 2016, 01:13:09 PM »
This is in definitive a great project. !!!
I wish to said that I have a little background in Mac Os Pascal and C programing and I had compiled a few Linux programs. My knowledge in this area is small, but enough to know that exceed my capacities. :)
I'm only saying this, to avoid you to feel alone, may be at some point I can help a bit into testing and debugging some code ...
At some time in the past, I even worked in a few assembler hacks, may be it's time to re engage this task :) and let aside my "unwanted music" LOL
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #94 on: January 12, 2016, 01:32:40 PM »
I am sure many will consider even 1 item finished on the list an amazing feat. 

We can provide coffee and donuts (and maybe some movie tickets to get the kids/wife out of your hair) while you work on this important task.  Thanks, as always :)

The kid/wife get out of the house often enough and they both go to bed before I do so I still get some time (work is usually the bigger problem).

This is in definitive a great project. !!!
I wish to said that I have a little background in Mac Os Pascal and C programing and I had compiled a few Linux programs. My knowledge in this area is small, but enough to know that exceed my capacities. :)
I'm only saying this, to avoid you to feel alone, may be at some point I can help a bit into testing and debugging some code ...
At some time in the past, I even worked in a few assembler hacks, may be it's time to re engage this task :) and let aside my "unwanted music" LOL
If you are somewhat familiar with MacsBug and know c you can be a big asset in just figuring out various registers and instruction for hardware (such as video cards).
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #95 on: January 14, 2016, 02:25:28 AM »
There is no problem in getting Mac Os 9 hardware at all. Have a look at the 68k Macs. There is no problem to get 68k Macs as well, and those are 20 years old now.

these things mainly depend on ones location and social connections.

a quick search on ebay germany gives you 220 results for "mac pro", 15,000 results for "apple g4", and 0 for "apple 68k".

but if you live in indeonesia and dont want to (or ant) buy from internet offers the situation looks different.
"It is true that the "pre-emptive multitasking" advantage present in OS X can be illustrated by downloading CD-ROM ISOs and rendering chaos theory formulas while simultaneously instant messaging and posting on FaceBook what you ate... but in reality, what did you create?"
- DieHard, random forum troll at macos9lives.com

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #96 on: January 14, 2016, 07:18:42 AM »
I need some help from users out there.
To get things off the ground and running there are some hardware details I need.
As I don't have hardware for all the unsupported machines I ask any one out there who does have these machines to gather some details for me.
If you have an unsupported g4 then you have a machine I need details of.  What I'm currently looking for are CPU version numbers (PVR). I realize there are some lists out there, but they list all known cpu's and not exactly what machines they are in. (of course if you know a good location for that info, that would be great too.)

The info I need is out of Open firmware.  This should be unaltered details from open firmware.
I will post more detailed instruction on how to get this information if you are not familiar enough with open firmware to get this, when I am at home, but if you know how to get it then awesome.

So here's the exact details I need.
  • The model as identified in open firmware.
  • If the machine boots using one of the unsupported methods/images then how and what you do to boot it. (do you have to do any open firmware hacks, does one of the unsupported images here just boot).
  • If the machine will not boot with one of the unsupported methods then note what happens (generally this will be it starts and just hangs on a gray screen which at this point is directly related to cpu version).
  • the version identifier of the cpu. This will be a longer number not the 7447/7445/7447A that we are used to identifying them by.  The PVR is manufacturer specific and there can be multiple revisions of the same cpu so it is possible that there could be multiple PVR's for a 7447 (though I haven't seen that done)

If you want to get the PVR for any G5's as well, I will take those (in the event I do actually get to trying to get OS 9 running on a G5).
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #97 on: January 14, 2016, 08:29:54 AM »
Here you have the full PVR list, G5 is not included  :'(  in case you need it:

https://github.com/tycho/pearpc/blob/master/doc/powerpc_pvr_list.txt

I have a unsupported eMac. It boot in to Mac Os 9 with the iMic ROM and the OF cpu swap trick. The big issue is the lack of video acceleration. I'll will post it's PVR as soon as I can.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #98 on: January 14, 2016, 08:56:39 AM »
Here you have the full PVR list, G5 is not included  :'(  in case you need it:

https://github.com/tycho/pearpc/blob/master/doc/powerpc_pvr_list.txt

I have a unsupported eMac. It boot in to Mac Os 9 with the iMic ROM and the OF cpu swap trick. The big issue is the lack of video acceleration. I'll will post it's PVR as soon as I can.
I have that list thank you.  PearPC has another list that has the G5's in it that is shorter and appears to have only the models apple used.
http://pearpc.sourceforge.net/pvr.html

I'm looking to see what the pvr's are for the individual models to verify these lists and make sure any code I write accounts for any oddities.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline Mat

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 434
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #99 on: January 15, 2016, 01:27:38 AM »
There is no problem in getting Mac Os 9 hardware at all. Have a look at the 68k Macs. There is no problem to get 68k Macs as well, and those are 20 years old now.

these things mainly depend on ones location and social connections.

a quick search on ebay germany gives you 220 results for "mac pro", 15,000 results for "apple g4", and 0 for "apple 68k".

but if you live in indeonesia and dont want to (or ant) buy from internet offers the situation looks different.
Sure, you are right. It is always a problem that the male, white western users have access and many many others don´t. But still, emulation is absolutely NOT the way to go in my opinion.

I see nanopicos ideas about further developements as necessary and real improvements. An emulation that would be really usable at completely new hardware is not an good idea.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #100 on: January 25, 2016, 06:39:56 AM »
I had a bit of an interesting theory over the past weekend.
We are trying to boot machines that are not supported by 9 but are supported by X.
In researching I know that open firmware loads the rom. Runs the forth script at the beginning of the rom. Transfers execution to the trampoline code (the elf executable I've discussed earlier). Initializes hardware based on info from open firmware via the open firmware client interface.
Once everything is initialized it tells open firmware to stop and transfers control to the initialization code in the loaded toolbox rom.
My first goal was to get support for the newer G4's that require an open firmware patch to boot into OS 9.  These cpu's do not require this patch to boot X.  BootX is the boot loader in OS X that does the same thing as the trampoline code in the OS 9 ROM.  BootX is open source so it can easily be modified.  It knows how to initialize these cpu's (as well as some of the hardware required for boot in the G5's).  If I were to take bootx and modify the code to load a toolbox rom instead of a mach kernel and then attach the toolbox rom as a payload to it (much like the toolbox rom is embeded in the rom file we normally boot) then we would in theory be able to get around the early boot problems for all OS X only machines.  This doesn't mean they will work after this stage, but it will fix the early boot and the detection of what's bootable by the system.

I realize that there is not a strong liking of OS X around here (and you can lump me into that crowd), but this idea is just stealing a boot loader from X that really doesn't have much to do with X, so I think this is a good idea.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline DieHard

  • Administrator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1682
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #101 on: January 25, 2016, 08:16:52 AM »

BootX is the boot loader in OS X that does the same thing as the trampoline code in the OS 9 ROM.  BootX is open source so it can easily be modified.   If I were to take bootx and modify the code to load a toolbox rom instead of a mach kernel and then attach the toolbox rom as a payload to it...

I realize that there is not a strong liking of OS X around here (and you can lump me into that crowd), but this idea is just stealing a boot loader from X that really doesn't have much to do with X, so I think this is a good idea.

This is a real break thru in my opinion !   We are NOT X-aphobic and I don't think anyone cares what dances across the screen before 9 boots... so please hack away at the Bootx code if you can make it load the OS9 ROM :)

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #102 on: March 03, 2016, 06:12:45 PM »
Sorry all, but I'm a little slow at things lately.

The route of bootx is becoming a very nice option.

One of the things I've found going through this is that it makes a lot of open firmware calls (which is to be expected).  The nice thing though is it's sort of documentation on what a lot of the forth words are for various hardware devices that need to be initialized early on.  On of those devices is the mmu. I still have a lot of digging to do, but it might be possible, and that's a big might, to enable the full 2GB of ram on some of the G4's through some creative open firmware scripts (well at least as early test I guess). 
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #103 on: March 18, 2016, 06:39:22 AM »
GOOD NEWS!!!!!

I've noticed there have been some people who have to go in and use an nvramrc script to change the cpu-version to make 9 bootable.
This works well and is usefull, but if you ever have to reset the nvram or if your batteries die and it resets then you have to re-apply this patch.  Yes it's not painful, but I'd rather not have to do it.

Now iMic did a lot of awesome work with hacking the boot script that loads the trampoline code that loads the toolbox.  So since his updates worked well I followed the same path.  I have updated the boot script in the rom file to check for a G4 cpu with a newer cpu-version that isn't supported and change it to one that is.  This does the same thing as the nvramrc but will never have to be re-applyed and will make booting easier for people who are not familiar with open firmware or are scared of it.

Currently the file I modified doesn't boot for two reasons.  One, when I edited it the creator/file types got messed up so you have to manually force open firmware to ignore that and load it anyway.  Two, I didn't get the file adjusted to make the trampoline/elf portion re-aligned ok.  It was really really late when I finished this up and needed to get to bed, but it was able to load and run the script and did set the cpu-version and did try to boot the trampoline code, it was just at the wrong location.

So once I get those two items fixed (hopefully this evening) I will have a new rom for people to test/enjoy.

This still doesn't provide full valid support for those cpu's, but it will get more machines the option too boot or at least boot far enough to figure out what else needs to be changed.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline Protools5LEGuy

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2257
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #104 on: March 18, 2016, 06:49:44 AM »
These updates just make my day!

Thanks!
Looking for MacOS 9.2.4

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #105 on: March 19, 2016, 09:06:22 AM »
Great!
This will allow to those 7447 and 7448 upgrade cards to work without caring about the Open Firmware flashing :)
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #106 on: March 19, 2016, 09:04:03 PM »
And as promised (though a little later than mentioned)

I have tested this and have not had issues.  But having said that, I am not responsible if it does anything bad to your machine so test with caution.

I've modified it in a way that makes it generic.
It checks for a G4 and if present then checks the cpu version and modifies it if necessary.
This means it will boot on G3's and G4's that were already supported without modifying anything.

If it is not working I would appreciate the details of the machine it doesn't work on.

ROM File only
http://ww.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit

As a side note, when you've spent most of your career in languages like c, c# and the likes, Forth makes little sense at first.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #107 on: March 22, 2016, 08:17:30 AM »
are ROM files language specific? (they shouldnt?)
"It is true that the "pre-emptive multitasking" advantage present in OS X can be illustrated by downloading CD-ROM ISOs and rendering chaos theory formulas while simultaneously instant messaging and posting on FaceBook what you ate... but in reality, what did you create?"
- DieHard, random forum troll at macos9lives.com

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #108 on: March 22, 2016, 11:07:43 AM »
are ROM files language specific? (they shouldnt?)
I'm not sure if they are or not.  They might be.
When looking at the resources in there it looked like it was only US English on the one I edited.
But I haven't really looked into it much.
Are you seeing some sort of issues related to this?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #109 on: March 22, 2016, 11:38:19 AM »
are ROM files language specific? (they shouldnt?)

Yes, they are language specific. But if you use a Italian ROM, while the remaining system files are in French by example, you only have a couple of menu items in italian so It is perfectly usable. Or you can easily replace this language specific resources, because they are really few.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #110 on: March 22, 2016, 11:55:40 AM »
are ROM files language specific? (they shouldnt?)

Yes, they are language specific. But if you use a Italian ROM, while the remaining system files are in French by example, you only have a couple of menu items in italian so It is perfectly usable. Or you can easily replace this language specific resources, because they are really few.

So should I provide localized rom's then? 
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #111 on: March 22, 2016, 12:54:36 PM »
So should I provide localized rom's then?

I think it isn't necessary. It will be a nightmare to provide a dozen or two of localized ROMs. If someone is using a localized System version and wish to localize your generic ROM, it should copy/paste a few resources with ResEdit and it's done :)
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #112 on: March 22, 2016, 01:07:29 PM »
So should I provide localized rom's then?

I think it isn't necessary. It will be a nightmare to provide a dozen or two of localized ROMs. If someone is using a localized System version and wish to localize your generic ROM, it should copy/paste a few resources with ResEdit and it's done :)

Works for me.

On a side note, has any one tried the ROM i worked up here and is it working?  I didn't get to do as much testing as I like and due to some remodeling at home, I'm not able to do much dev work at the moment.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #113 on: March 23, 2016, 10:21:01 PM »
are ROM files language specific? (they shouldnt?)

Yes, they are language specific. But if you use a Italian ROM, while the remaining system files are in French by example, you only have a couple of menu items in italian so It is perfectly usable. Or you can easily replace this language specific resources, because they are really few.

ok, so while it will work to replace it (well of course it does) it might still change a few words somewhere where the user will see it.

@nano:
having different language files would be nice, but i believe that it could be less work for you to supply an updater/patch instead of the whole ROM (i.e. without checking the file where the patch is applied but with description for what exact ROM file and version it was made.)

for/from what is it, btw? OS9General.dmg-style or a QS 2002 golden master OS9?)


"It is true that the "pre-emptive multitasking" advantage present in OS X can be illustrated by downloading CD-ROM ISOs and rendering chaos theory formulas while simultaneously instant messaging and posting on FaceBook what you ate... but in reality, what did you create?"
- DieHard, random forum troll at macos9lives.com

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #114 on: March 24, 2016, 05:55:00 PM »
Great!
This will allow to those 7447 and 7448 upgrade cards to work without caring about the Open Firmware flashing :)

  If nothing else happened aside from this it would be fantastic just by itself!  Not having to worry about the Open Firmware nonsense is great for the less technically-inclined users and also simply much less of a pain in the butt for the savvy.  Knowing that I wouldn't have to worry about the OF settings getting lost randomly would bring great peace of mind.  If it can be incorporated into the 9.2.2 restore image so we have a bootable CD that works all of the time with upgrade CPUs it would save me a lot of hell and messing around.  It would also give me the freedom to move one of my CPU upgrades between systems for testing much more easily.  The one in my Quicksilver required the installer program to make the OF edits, so it was a pain.  (I don't know how much of this becomes a moot point if the hack of bootx is successful.)

  The only other things I'd suggest in improving the current 9.2.2 Universal would be to keep the multiprocessing support out of the system folder by default, and also put the final ATI drivers in.  As I mentioned before, both of these snags hit me in the same system.  My video card wouldn't work without the final ATI update applied.  The only problem I had remaining after that was some of the extensions for the older ATI cards also had to be disabled in order to prevent a third freeze with the particular card I was using.  Oddly the ATI freezing issue only occurred on one of two MDD FW800s, I really don't know why.

  I know it's kinda outside the scope of the current 9.2.2 Universal restore method, but it would be nice if there was some mechanism to detect hardware and only copy the necessary ATI files.  Also, is there any plan to incorporate the hacked older version of multiprocessing support, that does work, into the restore image?  I am running it without issue after manually substituting it.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #115 on: March 25, 2016, 07:09:21 AM »
Also, is there any plan to incorporate the hacked older version of multiprocessing support, that does work, into the restore image?  I am running it without issue after manually substituting it.
About what "hacked older version of multiprocessing support" are you talking about?
What version works with what CPU upgrade?
Because I have a NewerTech 7448 on a Sawtooth and I have tried every thing, -even the Sonnet hacked multiprocessing support file - and nothing works.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #116 on: March 25, 2016, 08:44:26 PM »
Also, is there any plan to incorporate the hacked older version of multiprocessing support, that does work, into the restore image?  I am running it without issue after manually substituting it.
About what "hacked older version of multiprocessing support" are you talking about?
What version works with what CPU upgrade?
Because I have a NewerTech 7448 on a Sawtooth and I have tried every thing, -even the Sonnet hacked multiprocessing support file - and nothing works.

  I don't know if it works for all machine/upgrade combinations but it is working on my FW800 with Sonnet MDX 1.8GHz.  The two CPUs are recognized by System Profiler using the file I found.  Waking from sleep doesn't return video but that could be for a number of other reasons including purely the current video card and extension (GeForce 2MX ADC), or the fact it's a FW800 motherboard.  I prefer to not sleep most of my Macs anyway because this has been trouble at times even under what should be ideal circumstances, most often video card related.  The file on the Universal 9.2.2 CD most certainly didn't work on my setup at all, so I at least see my current arrangement as a vast improvement.

I found the file download via this posting on the 68kmla.org forums:

https://68kmla.org/forums/index.php?/topic/15421-yay-sonnet-18ghz-duet-on-its-way/
(See post #5)

The direct link to the file is:

www.vintagecomp.com/sell/Sonnet/updatedCPU.sit

  I don't know if this file is the original that Sonnet hacked, or if it was a different one independently hacked.  It reports as Apple CPU Plugins - Mac OS CPU Software 4.5 - Version 3.5.  (I'm not sure how easy it would be to tell if it had different data internally from the Sonnet-hacked version.)  If that is already the one you have then perhaps it isn't 100% compatible with the NewerTech or the Sawtooth.  I have a NewerTech dual 1.8GHz in my Quicksilver (OSX 10.4/10.5) which I could test in my Sawtooth to see what happens.  I just have to locate the jumper settings and the installer again.  (It's been many years since it was installed in the QS.)

  In any case, it would be a hell of a lot better to have this file available than to see so many people never able to enable multiprocessing at all.  Perhaps it should be added to the list of things to test so that forum members can try it out on a wide range of platforms and report back.  Eventually someone better-versed in the system files might be able to dig into these files and figure out exactly what was altered and what, if anything, can be improved.

Offline GaryN

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1051
  • active member
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #117 on: March 26, 2016, 12:36:36 PM »
I have the same setup in a 3,6. I think the MP file was written by Sonnet specifically for the MDX. Still worth a try though. I was wrong once before back in '02…

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #118 on: March 27, 2016, 09:09:18 AM »
  You'd think it would have really put a dent in Sonnet's MP product sales if they'd never gotten it to work in all the other AGP machines except for the MDD.  Perhaps the first thing I'll do with my QS (before transplanting to the Sawtooth) is to do a 9.2.2 restore and test on that platform.  If it works there then I will try with either of my Sawtooths (I have two of them).

  Hopefully the MP files can eventually be analyzed by one of the 'brains' that is working on the OS9 and machine support updates so we know exactly how they work and how to patch them properly.  Perhaps a much later revision of the file could have the same patch(es) applied.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #119 on: March 27, 2016, 11:17:20 AM »
ROM File only
http://ww.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit

@nanopico: the download link is not available.
can you please re-upload this file? I wish to perform some test with it ...
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline GaryN

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1051
  • active member
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #120 on: March 27, 2016, 02:42:36 PM »
  You'd think it would have really put a dent in Sonnet's MP product sales if they'd never gotten it to work in all the other AGP machines except for the MDD.
Not at all sure what you're talking about. I'm saying the MP file that works with the MDX was written specifically for the MDX. As I recall, finding that was no easy task. I'm thinking there may be others for the DP upgrades Sonnet made for the QS and AGP that are still in the haystack somewhere.

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #121 on: March 27, 2016, 03:12:11 PM »
  You'd think it would have really put a dent in Sonnet's MP product sales if they'd never gotten it to work in all the other AGP machines except for the MDD.
Not at all sure what you're talking about. I'm saying the MP file that works with the MDX was written specifically for the MDX. As I recall, finding that was no easy task. I'm thinking there may be others for the DP upgrades Sonnet made for the QS and AGP that are still in the haystack somewhere.

  As you say, there must have been a file available to deal with the non-MDX systems, whether the file came from Sonnet or some other 3rd party.  That's exactly why I was wondering how MacTron was having trouble, since he said he'd tried "everything".  Given how much older a file version the hacked one I downloaded is versus the later stock Apple-supplied one in the 9.2.2 image, I am rather surprised it wouldn't work universally.  This seemed to suggest to me that this hacked file may have actually pre-dated the release of the Sonnet MDX CPUs.

  I'm really hoping that someone with more in-depth knowledge than I can delve into the various MP support files and sort this out.  At this point it's just guessing because I don't have the skill to properly probe these files for differences or to actually document the code structure or instructions present.

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #122 on: March 27, 2016, 09:05:35 PM »
  Quick update - As promised I hooked up my Quicksilver, previously only running OSX, and I tried to boot it using the 9.2.2 drive I was already booting my MDD and FW800 machines with.  The upgrade processor in this system is a Giga Designs 7447a dual 1.8GHZ G4.  The substitute multiprocessing file that worked with the Sonnet MDX on the other machines froze the QS - no big surprise.  (Removing it booted the system as single 1.8GHZ processor - super-speedy still!)  The Giga Designs software under OSX has to be run first to separately enable OS9 booting capability via some sort of PRAM alteration (in addition to originally having to alter the firmware and nvram to boot OSX at all in the first place before installing the upgrade).

  The Sonnet installer itself is supposed to patch the Apple CPU Plugins file, however due to the large number of revisions of the file by Apple the process often fails without any indication, presumably because it doesn't find anything it recognizes how to patch.  Sonnet was supposed to have been emailing a patched file on request.  I am going to send them a message and see if they can still do this.

  I'm not done researching the issue yet.  I'll post my findings later.  One thing though that potentially affects the Sawtooth systems is that one revision of the motherboard is completely incompatible with multi-processor CPU modules.  This is documented in the appropriate support section on the Sonnet website.  (The direct link to the PDF file in question is http://www.sonnettech.com/support/downloads/manuals/sg4d_2g_addendum.pdf.  I'm going to check both of my Sawtooth boards to see if they are of the offending revision before I waste my time on an automatic dead end.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #123 on: March 28, 2016, 06:05:17 AM »
ROM File only
http://ww.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit

@nanopico: the download link is not available.
can you please re-upload this file? I wish to perform some test with it ...

Isn't funny how you miss one little w and the link doesn't work?
http://www.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #124 on: March 28, 2016, 08:13:10 AM »
Isn't funny how you miss one little w and the link doesn't work?
http://www.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit
Thank You.
I should realize about that ...  :-[
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #125 on: March 28, 2016, 08:40:12 AM »
The Multi processors software is originated at Daystar for the Genesis MP Mac compatible computer ( equipped dual CPU 604e series ) later acquired by Apple.
And this software was integrated in to Mac Os. Its purpose was not only providing Multi CPU support for applications, but Deep Sleep and CPU power saving features.
The power saving features, while very important, are the responsible of a lot of peripherals failures, and -in my opinion- the startup crash if a 7447 or 7448 CPU is installed .
So we may have  a temporary fix  if we can somehow disable the CPU sleep without disabling the dual CPU support ...
The "Sonnet" fix is only working on MDX systems, so I have no idea about what they did to make it work.But it is possible that Sonnet disable the CPU Plugins somehow, while its own extension take care of the double 7447 CPU and/or the Sleep task.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline GaryN

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1051
  • active member
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #126 on: March 28, 2016, 03:14:09 PM »
FWIW…My MDD will now crash if I try to sleep it since I installed the Sonnet MDX.

Offline IIO

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2326
  • new to the forums
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #127 on: March 28, 2016, 07:11:58 PM »
Isn't funny how you miss one little w and the link doesn't work?

i thought that was intended ... as a little intelligence filter ... to protect noobs from downloading modded ROM files?
"It is true that the "pre-emptive multitasking" advantage present in OS X can be illustrated by downloading CD-ROM ISOs and rendering chaos theory formulas while simultaneously instant messaging and posting on FaceBook what you ate... but in reality, what did you create?"
- DieHard, random forum troll at macos9lives.com

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #128 on: March 28, 2016, 09:00:11 PM »
FWIW…My MDD will now crash if I try to sleep it since I installed the Sonnet MDX.

  Well, at least we're having a consistent experience!  Perhaps we need to try this program:

"Sleeper"
http://download.cnet.com/Sleeper/3000-2094_4-10003462.html

  If anyone has experience with this software, please post.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #129 on: March 29, 2016, 06:47:16 AM »
Isn't funny how you miss one little w and the link doesn't work?
http://www.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit
Thank You.
I should realize about that ...  :-[

Yeah but I also shouldn't post files as I'm falling asleep.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline GaryN

  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 1051
  • active member
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #130 on: March 29, 2016, 03:10:14 PM »
Well, at least we're having a consistent experience!  Perhaps we need to try this program:

"Sleeper"
http://download.cnet.com/Sleeper/3000-2094_4-10003462.html
If anyone has experience with this software, please post.

Cool. I'll try it and report back.

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #131 on: March 29, 2016, 09:08:41 PM »
Well, at least we're having a consistent experience!  Perhaps we need to try this program:

"Sleeper"
http://download.cnet.com/Sleeper/3000-2094_4-10003462.html
If anyone has experience with this software, please post.

Cool. I'll try it and report back.

  I'm very interested to know if this helps anything with our issue, and also if it's just a generally useful tool, mainly so I know if I should try to pursue paying for the software license after the trial expires.  The company website still exists but they don't themselves seem to directly mention this older software any longer.

  I've determined that my main Sawtooth is a usable revision for multiprocessing.  I've also determined that the Sawtooth I had in storage isn't working right and will need a lot of troubleshooting.  In addition, while digging around through my parts hoard I realized I have a Gigabit Ethernet motherboard which never had a case to call home.  If I get an adapter made up I should be able to power that one off a spare B&W power supply.

  Not that I expect either of these candidates to be any more likely to work dual in OS9 with the Giga Designs CPU I have, but the experiment would still be interesting.  I've sent off a message to Sonnet to see if anyone there still knows anything about the issue.  If I can find a reasonably-priced Sonnet Encore/ST Duet 1.8GHz I may very well buy it just so I have something extra to play with.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #132 on: March 31, 2016, 11:53:24 AM »
And as promised (though a little later than mentioned)

I have tested this and have not had issues.  But having said that, I am not responsible if it does anything bad to your machine so test with caution.

I've modified it in a way that makes it generic.
It checks for a G4 and if present then checks the cpu version and modifies it if necessary.
This means it will boot on G3's and G4's that were already supported without modifying anything.

If it is not working I would appreciate the details of the machine it doesn't work on.

ROM File only
http://ww.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit

This new "automatic" :) ROM, startup an unsupported eMac 1.25, without Open Firmware CPU hack!!.  ;D (now I having troubles with the eMac 1.25 video hack ...)
But the 7448 upgraded Sawtooth, nor chime, without Open Firmware CPU hacks, I'll investigate it further.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2016, 12:17:17 PM by MacTron »
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #133 on: March 31, 2016, 11:55:50 AM »
Well, at least we're having a consistent experience!  Perhaps we need to try this program:

"Sleeper"
http://download.cnet.com/Sleeper/3000-2094_4-10003462.html
If anyone has experience with this software, please post.

Cool. I'll try it and report back.

I have used "Sleeper" for a long time in some Macs. It works great. But it can't put a CPU into to sleep without the official support.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #134 on: March 31, 2016, 01:44:52 PM »
And as promised (though a little later than mentioned)

I have tested this and have not had issues.  But having said that, I am not responsible if it does anything bad to your machine so test with caution.

I've modified it in a way that makes it generic.
It checks for a G4 and if present then checks the cpu version and modifies it if necessary.
This means it will boot on G3's and G4's that were already supported without modifying anything.

If it is not working I would appreciate the details of the machine it doesn't work on.

ROM File only
http://ww.gnerder.com/files/rom.sit

This new "automatic" :) ROM, startup an unsupported eMac 1.25, without Open Firmware CPU hack!!.  ;D (now I having troubles with the eMac 1.25 video hack ...)
But the 7448 upgraded Sawtooth, nor chime, without Open Firmware CPU hacks, I'll investigate it further.

Well this is good to hear. So part way there.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #135 on: April 01, 2016, 06:19:29 AM »
But the 7448 upgraded Sawtooth, nor chime, without Open Firmware CPU hacks, I'll investigate it further.

The list of PVR's I was working off of to detect and adjust did not include a 7448.  Can you get as far as loading open firmware? If you can, can you you check the CPU Version property of the CPU and let me know what it is?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #136 on: April 01, 2016, 08:42:52 AM »
But the 7448 upgraded Sawtooth, nor chime, without Open Firmware CPU hacks, I'll investigate it further.

The list of PVR's I was working off of to detect and adjust did not include a 7448.  Can you get as far as loading open firmware? If you can, can you you check the CPU Version property of the CPU and let me know what it is?

No, I can't. The computer can't start. It don't make the startup chime.  :o

The eMac PVR is 80030101 ( PowerPC 7457A_v1.1)
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #137 on: April 01, 2016, 09:32:58 AM »
But the 7448 upgraded Sawtooth, nor chime, without Open Firmware CPU hacks, I'll investigate it further.

The list of PVR's I was working off of to detect and adjust did not include a 7448.  Can you get as far as loading open firmware? If you can, can you you check the CPU Version property of the CPU and let me know what it is?

No, I can't. The computer can't start. It don't make the startup chime.  :o

The eMac PVR is 80030101 ( PowerPC 7457A_v1.1)

Found it.  The 7448 is cpu version 80040101
For the rom I made I check if the version is higher than 80020102 and then set it to 80020102.
The so the ROM should work with the 7448
So if you you get no chime the ROM hasn't even loaded yet and from what I have read the nvram scripts don't run until after the chime. 

Maybe you need to pull the graphics card while it's on and plug it back in. (seriously though not recommended)
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #138 on: April 01, 2016, 10:02:11 AM »
MacTron, you don't have any later model you could test that CPU in, do you?  If your Sawtooth won't even chime with the Sonnet installed I don't think it's likely ever going to work in that particular motherboard.  At least testing on another motherboard would help with 'proof of concept'.  This is why I'm keen on getting the spare Gigabit Ethernet motherboard I have working, plus it gives me a lot more options for video cards since it has an ADC-compliant AGP slot, which the Sawtooth doesn't.  Did you check the UNI-North revision of your board as per Sonnet's instructions?  I at least now know that my one Sawtooth has a suitable UNI-North should I choose to test on it.

Very interesting stuff with those PVR values.  It looks like we're getting much closer to eliminating the initial snag of at least getting as far as video on most machines.  It would be really nice to put all that NVRAM nonsense behind us because it will open up testing to a lot more users and therefore a wider range of hardware.  Then it's mostly just down to dealing with the specifics of certain hardware sub-components in each machine.

On a partly related note I just had a thought - for devices like internal USB bluetooth that are throwing up "no driver" messages, if there's no hope of writing a functional driver could we at least make a 'dummy' driver so the message doesn't come up every boot?


Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #139 on: April 01, 2016, 11:29:55 AM »
MacTron, you don't have any later model you could test that CPU in, do you?  If your Sawtooth won't even chime with the Sonnet installed I don't think it's likely ever going to work in that particular motherboard.  At least testing on another motherboard would help with 'proof of concept'.  This is why I'm keen on getting the spare Gigabit Ethernet motherboard I have working, plus it gives me a lot more options for video cards since it has an ADC-compliant AGP slot, which the Sawtooth doesn't.  Did you check the UNI-North revision of your board as per Sonnet's instructions?  I at least now know that my one Sawtooth has a suitable UNI-North should I choose to test on it.

Maybe here we have a misunderstanding. I know my english is awful.
The 7448 upgraded Sawtooth was working until I tried the nano pico "automatic" ROM, previously disabling all the Open Firmware patches.
Once I'll re-patch the system, I will check the 7448 PVR.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #140 on: April 01, 2016, 12:53:09 PM »
Update:
I have patched the sawtooth again, and it is working OK. I have applied only the 7457/7447/7448 enabler patch, not the NVRAM patch for enabling Mac Os 9 booting, because isn't needed with this ROM !!
... so the Sawtooth can work with any G4 CPU from now on, without worrying about OF patches (once the first one is applied) ...

I have checked the PVR and it is 80010201  :o ¿?

So once the firmware is patched, the 7447/7448 become 7445_v2.1 or 7455_v2.1, even in the OpenFirmware.
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #141 on: April 01, 2016, 01:52:46 PM »
Update:
I have patched the sawtooth again, and it is working OK. I have applied only the 7457/7447/7448 enabler patch, not the NVRAM patch for enabling Mac Os 9 booting, because isn't needed with this ROM !!
... so the Sawtooth can work with any G4 CPU from now on, without worrying about OF patches (once the first one is applied) ...

I have checked the PVR and it is 80010201  :o ¿?

So once the firmware is patched, the 7447/7448 become 7445_v2.1 or 7455_v2.1, even in the OpenFirmware.

Interesting.  Would you be able to provide the enabler patch you applied.  Maybe I can integrate that into things, unless it is purely a hardware type patch.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #142 on: April 01, 2016, 02:29:05 PM »
The patch is applied booting with the official NewerTech "Firmware Enabler CD" .
I have posted it in other occasions, I'll try to find it.

What I don't understand is why they have to patch both  the firmware and the NVRAM...
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #143 on: April 01, 2016, 04:52:48 PM »
The patch is applied booting with the official NewerTech "Firmware Enabler CD" .
I have posted it in other occasions, I'll try to find it.
Here it is:
https://www.adrive.com/public/PVNy3F/NewerTech.toast.sit

Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #144 on: April 01, 2016, 07:39:05 PM »
The patch is applied booting with the official NewerTech "Firmware Enabler CD" .
I have posted it in other occasions, I'll try to find it.

What I don't understand is why they have to patch both  the firmware and the NVRAM...

Is this patch needed for running OS X with that CPU as well?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacOS Plus

  • Gold Member (200+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 418
  • The 9serve Lives!
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #145 on: April 01, 2016, 09:54:07 PM »
Maybe here we have a misunderstanding. I know my english is awful.
The 7448 upgraded Sawtooth was working until I tried the nano pico "automatic" ROM, previously disabling all the Open Firmware patches.
Once I'll re-patch the system, I will check the 7448 PVR.

  Ah, sorry.  I didn't know you had it working before you messed with it.  That's good to know you have a fully-working platform under normal circumstances.

Update:
I have patched the sawtooth again, and it is working OK. I have applied only the 7457/7447/7448 enabler patch, not the NVRAM patch for enabling Mac Os 9 booting, because isn't needed with this ROM !!
... so the Sawtooth can work with any G4 CPU from now on, without worrying about OF patches (once the first one is applied) ...

I have checked the PVR and it is 80010201  :o ¿?

So once the firmware is patched, the 7447/7448 become 7445_v2.1 or 7455_v2.1, even in the OpenFirmware.

  Now that is incredibly interesting!  I think you've stumbled upon some really useful information.  Anything we can use to simplify the setup of the accelerated systems is priceless, especially if it helps with the "9.3" project.  The less we have to screw around with the hidden low-level workings of the hardware, the better.

  While I get the general idea, I'd really like to know exactly what modifications each upgrade CPU manufacturer's software are making to the system.  Is there any possibility of extracting the scripts or commands from these applications in order to understand fully what they are performing?  If we can use this information in some way within the ROM file or otherwise it would be fantastic because it would greatly simplify working with setting up such systems.

The patch is applied booting with the official NewerTech "Firmware Enabler CD" .
I have posted it in other occasions, I'll try to find it.

What I don't understand is why they have to patch both  the firmware and the NVRAM...

Is this patch needed for running OS X with that CPU as well?

  The install software for my Giga Designs CPU runs under OSX.  It has separate functions for enabling OSX support and for enabling OS9.x support.

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #146 on: April 02, 2016, 03:11:29 AM »
  The install software for my Giga Designs CPU runs under OSX.  It has separate functions for enabling OSX support and for enabling OS9.x support.

Is this patch needed for running OS X with that CPU as well?

The NewerTech Firmware Enabler CD contains a 32k NewerTech ROM (written by Terry Greeniaus) that can boot the Mac and apply the patches. If you open this ROM with an hexadecimal editor you can examine the NVRAM scripts and other stuff.

After boot, a  screen will appear and you will see the following:
Code: [Select]
-----------------------------------------------------
NewerTech 7457/7447A/7448 Enabler 3.1b5
Copyright (c) 2003-06 by Newer Technology, Inc. All rights
Reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mapping flash and mirroring in RAM . . .
Identifying flash. . .
Identified Micron B1 Bottom flash.
Validating flash images. . .
Identifying which areas of ROM need to be patched.
Identifying which patches have been installed.
Please select an option from the following menu:
1. Apply 7457/7447A/7448 enabler patch (7457/7447A/7448 CPUs will
not boot).
2. Apply PLL patch (Apple System Profiler should report correct CPU
speeds).
3. Apply L3CR extended ratios patch (L3 cache ratios above 6:1 will
work).
4. Apply thermal fan control patch (Fan will turn on only when
necessary).
5. Apply all patches
6. Set up NVRAM for booting into Mac OS 9.
7. Set up NVRAM for booting into Mac OS X.
8. Shut down.
>
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #147 on: April 02, 2016, 06:39:23 AM »
After boot, a  screen will appear and you will see the following:
Code: [Select]
-----------------------------------------------------
NewerTech 7457/7447A/7448 Enabler 3.1b5
Copyright (c) 2003-06 by Newer Technology, Inc. All rights
Reserved.
------------------------------------------------------------------
Mapping flash and mirroring in RAM . . .
Identifying flash. . .
Identified Micron B1 Bottom flash.
Validating flash images. . .
Identifying which areas of ROM need to be patched.
Identifying which patches have been installed.
Please select an option from the following menu:
1. Apply 7457/7447A/7448 enabler patch (7457/7447A/7448 CPUs will
not boot).
2. Apply PLL patch (Apple System Profiler should report correct CPU
speeds).
3. Apply L3CR extended ratios patch (L3 cache ratios above 6:1 will
work).
4. Apply thermal fan control patch (Fan will turn on only when
necessary).
5. Apply all patches
6. Set up NVRAM for booting into Mac OS 9.
7. Set up NVRAM for booting into Mac OS X.
8. Shut down.
>

Based on that output it I might assume you have to run this installer/patcher with the old cpu in place and after running this you put the upgrade cpu in? Is that correct or can this all be done with the new one in place?
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!

Offline MacTron

  • Global Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 2087
  • keep it simple
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #148 on: April 02, 2016, 07:52:59 AM »
Based on that output it I might assume you have to run this installer/patcher with the old cpu in place and after running this you put the upgrade cpu in?
Yes, That's it.

Quote
Is that correct or can this all be done with the new one in place?

If you install the CPU upgrade  (7448/7447) without previously applied the 1# patch at least. The Mac don't boot at all. No startup chime, (nor Open Firmware of course)
Please don't PM about things that are not private.

Offline nanopico

  • Moderator
  • Platinum Member (500+ Posts)
  • *****
  • Posts: 722
Re: Any one want to help build a community made OS 9.3?
« Reply #149 on: April 02, 2016, 07:55:17 PM »
Based on that output it I might assume you have to run this installer/patcher with the old cpu in place and after running this you put the upgrade cpu in?
Yes, That's it.

Quote
Is that correct or can this all be done with the new one in place?

If you install the CPU upgrade  (7448/7447) without previously applied the 1# patch at least. The Mac don't boot at all. No startup chime, (nor Open Firmware of course)

I looked into it more and the firmware patch I believe will always be required due to it being a boot rom patch, but the nvram patch would no longer be necessary.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it, or break it so you can fix it!