PDA

View Full Version : Concurrent CP/M 86



DreadStorm
March 24th, 2008, 03:31 PM
Was this designed to run on PCs and compatibles? For example, can I run it on my tower here? Or is it for a specific kind of computer?

I found it at that VetusWare site.

modem7
March 25th, 2008, 02:28 AM
"Digital Research did go on to introduce CP/M-86, a version of CP/M that works on 8088 and 8086 central processors. While it, too, is similar to earlier versions of CP/M, it does have some differences in operation. Later versions of CP/M-86 are Concurrent CP/M-86, a version that allows one user to run multiple programs simultaneously, and MP/M-86, which allows multiple users to work from a single computer. As with MP/M, the 8086 versions of CP/M retain the same structure of information on disk, meaning two machines with different processors but the same disk drives can change data."

CityArchitect
April 25th, 2008, 10:29 AM
Was this designed to run on PCs and compatibles? For example, can I run it on my tower here? Or is it for a specific kind of computer?

I found it at that VetusWare site.

I was a developer on CCPM/86 on a Jarogate computer. This was a UK built, non-PC 80386 architecture machine that supported 16 Wyse 50 serial terminals.

Being essentially CP/M you could develop the BIOS for just about any machine.

Terry Yager
April 25th, 2008, 12:33 PM
IIRC, CCP/M falls into a kinda gray area. When I ran it on my Altos 686, (which was also just as happy with MS-DOS or Xenix) it was known as CCP/M, but they were going thru a transition, as the manual for it would alternately refer to it as both CCDOS and CCP/M. I believe it was abandoned around this time, so I'm not sure what the 'official' name for it really is today. Either way though, it was written (ported) to run on the x86. I think the -86 suffix came along later.

--T

Sharkonwheels
April 25th, 2008, 02:13 PM
You sure you're not confusing the two?

Concurrent CP/M was one thing, and Concurrent DOS was another. The former, CP/M, the latter, actually ran MS-DOS software.

T

Micom 2000
April 25th, 2008, 08:40 PM
That raises an interesting question. I have a Concurrent CP/M system disk for my DEC Rainbow which has both an "86 and a Zilog 80 CPU. I remember having problems getting it to boot and at the moment it's problematic to get at the 'Bow to try again. Both the DOS and CP/M boots were without problem. IIRC the opening screen asked for which system you wanted to boot (there is an 86 and a CP/M partition on my HD) , or the inserted system disk indicated automatically which OS to use. I imagine the Commodore 128s were similar.

How would the BIOS know which CPU to use if CCP/M and DOS were equally compatible ? I go with Shark on this one.
On Tim Olmsteads site he also has some CCP/M 86 stuff.

http://www.cpm.z80.de/binary.html

Lawrence

Sharkonwheels
April 25th, 2008, 09:17 PM
Hmm...

Lawrence, I think the 'bow was a different beast altogther, but not sure.
Never tried CCP/M on the 'bow. They had that wierd CP/M-80/86, which would run both Z80 and 8086 (8088?) CP/M programs, under the same boot image, which I think is quite cool to begin with.

However, I am pretty sure CCP/M and C-DOS were different. I think Concurrent DOS was a MultiUser DOS (or multi-tasking) for MS-DOS apps, and Concurrent CP/M was for standard CP/M programs.

Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Concurrent_dos) says CP/M and MP/M were put together into Concurrent CP/M. Also says Concurrent DOS was for DOS comatible apps, and later Concurrent DOS/386 exploited the 386+ architecture.

of course, we all know about wiki - gotta be careful trusting it, but the above SOUNDS correct...


T

Terry Yager
April 27th, 2008, 03:11 PM
You sure you're not confusing the two?

Concurrent CP/M was one thing, and Concurrent DOS was another. The former, CP/M, the latter, actually ran MS-DOS software.

T

The product was actually named Concurrent DOS, but it must have evolved from CCP/M-86 (rather than being built from scratch), as the documentation was only partly updated, using both names interchangeably in different places. I'm not sure if another version of docs or s/w ever came out after that.

--T

billdeg
April 27th, 2008, 04:04 PM
Does anyone here have concurrent DOS running on a system? screen shots?

Terry Yager
April 27th, 2008, 05:51 PM
it was known as CCP/M,

Ahh, I see. My bad...shoulda said CDOS...

--T

MikeS
April 27th, 2008, 10:35 PM
Ahh, I see. My bad...shoulda said CDOS...

--T
-----
Nope; CDOS is Cromemco's version of CP/M.
;-)
m

Terry Yager
April 27th, 2008, 10:54 PM
Concurrent DOS.

--T

PrintStar
June 3rd, 2008, 09:50 AM
That raises an interesting question. I have a Concurrent CP/M system disk for my DEC Rainbow which has both an "86 and a Zilog 80 CPU. I remember having problems getting it to boot and at the moment it's problematic to get at the 'Bow to try again. Both the DOS and CP/M boots were without problem. IIRC the opening screen asked for which system you wanted to boot (there is an 86 and a CP/M partition on my HD) , or the inserted system disk indicated automatically which OS to use. I imagine the Commodore 128s were similar.

How would the BIOS know which CPU to use if CCP/M and DOS were equally compatible ?

On the Rainbow, Concurrent CP/M was Concurrent CP/M-86, so the Z80 was used much as if the system were booted to DOS. CP/M-80 programs do not run under CCP/M-86 on the Rainbow. The Z80 can only execute programs under CP/M-86/80 on the Rainbow (although I'm sure someone with a lot of spare time could get it to execute Z80 code outside CP/M-86/80).

CCP/M-86 on the Rainbow, at least, is a pain in the #$@ to boot from the hard drive. It had some really weird requirements that neither DOS nor CP/M-86/80 cared about.

billdeg
June 3rd, 2008, 06:09 PM
For Concurrent DOS to run on a IBM-format computer you need a Starlink card installed, just the software alone will not be enough. I have pieced together the parts for such a system, when I get around to it I will see what I can do with it.
BD

SteveH
January 1st, 2009, 03:15 PM
Does anyone here have concurrent DOS running on a system? screen shots?

I've currently got Concurrent-DOS XM 6.2 running on an old Panasonic Portable system (8088 CPU). I've even had it running on a Pentium class PC. Any particular screen shot wanted?


For Concurrent DOS to run on a IBM-format computer you need a Starlink card installed,...

Only true if your implementation of Concurrent-DOS was built to use the Starlink comms card. My copy of CDOS XM only uses the standard COM1/2 ports. I've got somewhere a copy of CDOS 386 that I cannot use at it was built for a specific multi-port comms card (cannot remember the comm port make off hand). The comm ports were used to attach ascii terminals. I've installed CDOS at clients who had 16 and 32 port comms cards.

Steve

Terry Yager
January 1st, 2009, 07:47 PM
The copy I have will only run on the Altos 686 it was customized for, but that machine is kind of a strange bird anyway.

--T

SteveH
January 2nd, 2009, 08:56 AM
Never tried CCP/M on the 'bow. They had that wierd CP/M-80/86, which would run both Z80 and 8086 (8088?) CP/M programs, under the same boot image, which I think is quite cool to begin with.

Whilst I cannot comment on the Rainbow, I've played (back in the late 80s) with CP/M-86/80 BIOS and CCP/M-86/80 XIOS code for the LSI-M4 and CAL-PC. It was actually quite simple how they invoked CP/M-80 pgms. It went something like this:



The BIOS or XIOS init code pached the CCP to jump to its own routine whenever a .CMD file was to be opened.
This new routine first called the standard CCP routine to open the .CMD file. If that worked OK it simply jumped back into the CCP to continue and load .CMD file.
However, if the .CMD file open failed, it would check if a SAVE command had been entered. If it had, it would save the required number of paragraphs of the bank of memory last allocated to the Z80 processor to the specified file name.
If it wasn't a SAVE command it would try and open a .COM file. If that worked it would allocate a 64k bank, load the .COM file, copy in the Z80 FCB, jump tables, bios code etc., then poll around some in/out instructions that boot the Z80 and handle BDOS and BIOS/XIOS calls from the Z80. The 86 CPU would process the BDOS and BIOS/XIOS calls and send the results back to the Z80.

Just for the fun of it, I fitted an NEC V20 to a CAL-PC and wrote a simple CP/M-80 emulator that would run under CP/M-86. The code and executable can still be found here: http://www.eolith.co.uk/mirrors/cpm86/86emulat.zip. My program is VCPM15.CMD.

Steve

SteveH
January 2nd, 2009, 10:25 AM
The copy I have will only run on the Altos 686 it was customized for, but that machine is kind of a strange bird anyway.
Yeah, at the time every Tom, Dick and Harry were customising CCP/M or CDOS for their specific machines. However, more vendors started adopting IBM compatible hardware. The company I worked for did just that.

Chuck(G)
January 4th, 2009, 03:23 PM
I'm trying to follow the discussion on this one.

I've got both CCPM and Concurrent DOS for the PC platform. They run just fine. ISTR that very early versions of Concurrent DOS could read and write CCPM 86 diskettes, but can someone verify this?

SteveH
January 5th, 2009, 12:27 PM
Afraid I can't confirm categorically, but what I remember of versions of the "Concurrent" family that I've actually used are:

Concurrent CP/M-86 (BDOS ver 1430h) only handles CP/M media by default (some vendors provided utility support to handle DOS media).

The following all supported DOS media by default but had a utility to support CP/M media:

Concurrent PC-DOS (BDOS ver 1432h)
Concurrent DOS (BDOS ver 1441h)
Concurrent DOS XM (BDOS vers 1451h, 1460h, 1462h)
Concurrent DOS 386

Apparently DOS-Plus, as found on the Amstrad PC1512, was a suped up version of Concurrent CP/M-86 with added DOS emulation and could handle both CP/M and DOS media.