Re: [hatari-users] AssemPro Debugger Hang |
[ Thread Index |
Date Index
| More lists.tuxfamily.org/hatari-users Archives
]
- To: hatari-users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Subject: Re: [hatari-users] AssemPro Debugger Hang
- From: Mike Harbour <mike.harbour@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 13 May 2020 22:03:04 +0100 (BST)
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=virginmedia.com; s=meg.feb2017; t=1589403784; bh=AIt6rxMwn9ev30fnR2CHs4eJVB1FObadTKbtThbjVV0=; h=Date:From:To:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=RsXFvuxPwrvTms2WpeEPtG2mUo6P2PA8eu7MaIpwcMhCP6hj2+WoKZduP3iUryPxX pGOGTgwrDOkoICfkBT/pZ6ZKDkQ0FB7EoW6ISeqMVCAh6sZZW6ZOA+rTUY0kl7sFUu JyZ8B9RaeucTKdRYUhkja8l9U7rhAsMUQq18egWgv1tQcpPJviIvjsE6lryiCya5HH 2e2jtXoDgk7DF9j1CCHNR2uP2Cxwn59Lnen3j738PFPqoAZptJ+4pX5fPpCVcitw2H M20X15W6kDmj4UxTRL/0cOKGg7wyZK4Ol/zdh64g6rJ48HfWyQVOPojkJl0QBUO+6e 8pyixEzjtDWdw==
Hi. Wow: thanks for such a quick reply!
> I'm afraid there's no such thing. Do you mean ST TOS 1.04, or STE TOS 1.6x?
Quite right, apologies. I meant the former, ST TOS 1.04.
> If you e.g. remove your Hatari configuration file and start with
> defaults (giving TOS file e.g. with --tos command line option), does it
> still fail?
I did this ... and ..it's worked! Marvellous! Thanks so much!
Clearly there's something awry in my cfg.
It's a bit late today to do much further investigation, but I will systematically put bits of my cfg back in an see what throws it: I must have chosen some inappropriate/incompatible bits no doubt. I'll report back in case its of interest.
> Are you sure you're using exactly the same configuration both on MiST
> and Hatari? Using same machine type & CPU frequency, running from same
> drive, with same amount of RAM, same TOS version etc?
No, I cant be sure, I guess I was meaning that the files involved, the TOS.img and the .st disk image were the things the same. I can see that opens many doors for ruining a meaningful comparison.
> Btw. I think MiST implementation of 68000 ST is less accurate than
> Hatari one, so that's not necessary indication of Hatari doing something
> wrong.
Understood, apologies for the implication.
Thanks very much again!
Mike
> On 13 May 2020 at 20:16 Eero Tamminen <oak@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>
> Hi,
>
> On 5/13/20 9:33 PM, Mike Harbour wrote:
> > Just wanted to say hello, and thanks for Hatari - a great program that I have used on and off for hobbying for many years.
>
> Welcome to the list!
>
>
> > I do assembly language coding (at a beginner level) in the STE TOS 1.04 setup, using the AssemPro assembler, which is a nice package.
>
> I'm afraid there's no such thing. Do you mean ST TOS 1.04, or STE TOS 1.6x?
>
>
> > I thought I'd tell you of a glitch I've come across which may be of interest to you, maybe not.
> >
> > The Debugger part of AssemPro doesn't work under Hatari, (running either on Mac or on Windows). It hangs the system (not Hatari itself but the emulated system inside).
>
> What is your Hatari configuration?
>
> If you e.g. remove your Hatari configuration file and start with
> defaults (giving TOS file e.g. with --tos command line option), does it
> still fail?
>
> Does it fail only with GEMDOS HD, or also when running from floppy image?
>
> Have you tried different memory amounts or other TOS versions?
>
>
> > The reason I thought it might be of interest to you is that the exact same PRG and TOS files cope fine on the MiST box - there the Debugger in AssemPro works. I wondered if there might be some interesting hardware-specfic magic going on. But I severely lack the skills to diagnose this sort of thing myself :(
>
> Are you sure you're using exactly the same configuration both on MiST
> and Hatari? Using same machine type & CPU frequency, running from same
> drive, with same amount of RAM, same TOS version etc?
>
>
> Btw. I think MiST implementation of 68000 ST is less accurate than
> Hatari one, so that's not necessary indication of Hatari doing something
> wrong.
>
> (Or is the cycle-accurate core for MiSTer ported back to MiST?)
>
>
> - Eero
>
>