Gregory's Server
@nina_kali_nina Since TRON is more of an architectural specification than a concrete OS implementation, I’m guessing these have way more differences than similarities. Was there a common (presumably commercial) ancestor for most TRONs, or is it really a diversity of OSes sharing a common specification?
|
5 comments
@bytex64 @nina_kali_nina There are many different TRON implementations that are completely independent of one another, although most of these are ITRON unikernels. AFAICT BTRON has only ever really had one lineage of implementations, specifically the Panasonic/PMC one consisting of BTRON286/1B, 3B/B-right/Chokanji, and T-shell (which is a port of much of Chokanji from a legacy ITRON kernel to T-kernel, intended mostly for embedded use) @bytex64 @nina_kali_nina There was an effort in the early 2000s to produce a free BTRON implementation independent of Panasonic and PMC, known at various points as B-free, BTRON386, and EOTA, although this only ever produced what amounts to a Unix with an ITRON microkernel and a weird Forth-like shell; they never got around to actually implementing the BTRON subsystem for it (this will of course be in my OS museum VM as well) |
@bytex64 there's a bunch of open-source kernels that work on very wide range of hardware, from 8051 to RP2040, and the license allows using the code mostly free, it seems.