|
|
@@ -3,7 +3,8 @@ |
|
|
|
*Bootstrap post-collapse technology* |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collapse OS is a z80 kernel and a collection of programs, tools and |
|
|
|
documentation that allows you to assemble an OS that can: |
|
|
|
documentation that allows you to assemble an OS that, when completed, will be |
|
|
|
able to: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Run on an extremely minimal and improvised architecture. |
|
|
|
2. Communicate through a improvised serial interface linked to some kind of |
|
|
@@ -22,199 +23,28 @@ tools. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Status |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The project is progressing well! Highlights: |
|
|
|
The project unfinished but is progressing well! Highlights: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* Self replicates: Can assemble itself from within itself, given enough RAM and |
|
|
|
storage. |
|
|
|
* Has a shell that can poke memory, I/O, call arbitrary code from memory. |
|
|
|
* Can "upload" code from serial link into memory and execute it. |
|
|
|
* Can manage multiple "block devices" |
|
|
|
* Can read SD cards as block devices |
|
|
|
* Can manage multiple "block devices". |
|
|
|
* Can read and write to SD cards. |
|
|
|
* A z80 assembler, written in z80 that is self-assembling and can assemble the |
|
|
|
whole project. 4K binary, uses less than 16K of memory to assemble the kernel |
|
|
|
or itself. |
|
|
|
whole project. |
|
|
|
* Compact: |
|
|
|
* Kernel: 3K binary, 1800 SLOC. |
|
|
|
* ZASM: 4K binary, 2300 SLOC, 16K RAM usage to assemble kernel or itself. |
|
|
|
* Extremely flexible: Kernel parts are written as loosely knit modules that |
|
|
|
are bound through glue code. This makes the kernel adaptable to many unforseen |
|
|
|
situations. |
|
|
|
* A typical kernel binary of less than 2K (but size vary wildly depending on |
|
|
|
parts you include). |
|
|
|
* Built with minimal tooling: only [libz80][libz80] is needed |
|
|
|
* From a GNU environment, can be built with minimal tooling: only |
|
|
|
[libz80][libz80], make and a C compiler are needed. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Why? |
|
|
|
## More information |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I expect our global supply chain to collapse before we reach 2030. With this |
|
|
|
collapse, we won't be able to produce most of our electronics because it |
|
|
|
depends on a very complex supply chain that we won't be able to achieve again |
|
|
|
for decades (ever?). |
|
|
|
Go to [Collapse OS' website](https://collapseos.org) for more information on the |
|
|
|
project. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The fast rate of progress we've seen since the advent of electronics happened |
|
|
|
in very specific conditions that won't be there post-collapse, so we can't hope |
|
|
|
to be able to bootstrap new electronic technology as fast we did without a good |
|
|
|
"starter kit" to help us do so. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Electronics yield enormous power, a power that will give significant advantages |
|
|
|
to communities that manage to continue mastering it. This will usher a new age |
|
|
|
of *scavenger electronics*: parts can't be manufactured any more, but we have |
|
|
|
billions of parts lying around. Those who can manage to create new designs from |
|
|
|
those parts with low-tech tools will be very powerful. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Among these scavenged parts are microcontrollers, which are especially powerful |
|
|
|
but need complex tools (often computers) to program them. Computers, after a |
|
|
|
couple of decades, will break down beyond repair and we won't be able to |
|
|
|
program microcontrollers any more. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
To avoid this fate, we need to have a system that can be designed from |
|
|
|
scavenged parts and program microcontrollers. We also need the generation of |
|
|
|
engineers that will follow us to be able to *create* new designs instead of |
|
|
|
inheriting a legacy of machines that they can't recreate and barely maintain. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is where Collapse OS comes in. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Goals |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
On face value, goals outlined in the introduction don't seem very ambitious, |
|
|
|
that is, until we take the time to think about what kind of machines we are |
|
|
|
likely to be able to build from scavenged parts without access to (functional) |
|
|
|
modern technology. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By "minimal machine" I mean [Grant Searle's minimal z80 computer][searle]. |
|
|
|
This (admirably minimal and elegant) machine runs on 8k of ROM and 56k of RAM. |
|
|
|
Anything bigger starts being much more complex because you need memory paging, |
|
|
|
and if you need paging, then you need a kernel that helps you manage that, |
|
|
|
etc.. Of course, I don't mean that these more complex computers can't be built |
|
|
|
post-collapse, but that if we don't have a low-enough bar, we reduce the |
|
|
|
likeliness for a given community to bootstrap itself using Collape OS. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Of course, with this kind of specs, a C compiler is out of the question. Even |
|
|
|
full-fledged assembler is beginning to stretch the machine's ressources. The |
|
|
|
assembler having to be written in assembler (to be self-replicating), we need |
|
|
|
to design a watered-down version of our modern full-fledged assembler |
|
|
|
languages. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But with assemblers, a text editor and a way to write data to flash, you have |
|
|
|
enough to steadily improve your technological situation, build more |
|
|
|
sophisticated machines from more sophisticated scavenged parts and, who knows, |
|
|
|
in a couple of decades, build a new IC fab (or bring an old one back to life). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Organisation of this repository |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
There's very little done so far, but here's how it's organized: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
* `kernel`: Pieces of code to be assembled by the user into a kernel. |
|
|
|
* `apps`: Pieces of code to be assembled into "userspace" application. |
|
|
|
* `recipes`: collection of recipes that assemble parts together on a specific |
|
|
|
machine. |
|
|
|
* `doc`: User guide for when you've successfully installed Collapse OS. |
|
|
|
* `tools`: Tools for working with Collapse OS from "modern" environments. Mostly |
|
|
|
development tools, but also contains emulated zasm, which is |
|
|
|
necessary to build Collapse OS from a non-Collapse OS machine. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Each folder has a README with more details. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Roadmap |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The roadmap used to be really hazy, but with the first big goal (that was to |
|
|
|
have a self-assembling system) reached, the feasability of the project is much |
|
|
|
more likely and the horizon is clearing out. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of now, that self-assembling system is hard to use outside of an emulated |
|
|
|
environment, so the first goal is to solidify what I have. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Error out gracefully in ZASM. It can compile almost any valid code that scas |
|
|
|
can, but it has undfined behavior on invalid code and that make it very hard |
|
|
|
to use. |
|
|
|
2. Make shell, CFS, etc. convenient enough to use so that I can easily assemble |
|
|
|
code on an SD card and write the binary to that same SD card from within a |
|
|
|
RC2014. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After that, then it's the longer term goals: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1. Get out of the serial link: develop display drivers for a vga output card |
|
|
|
that I have still to cobble up together, then develop input driver for some |
|
|
|
kind of PS/2 interface card I'll have to cobble up together. |
|
|
|
2. Add support for writing to flash/eeprom from the RC2014. |
|
|
|
3. Add support for floppy storage. |
|
|
|
4. Add support for all-RAM systems through bootloading from storage. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then comes the even longer term goals, that is, widen support for all kind of |
|
|
|
machines and peripherals. It's worth mentionning, however, that supporting |
|
|
|
*specific* peripherals isn't on the roadmap. There's too many of them out there |
|
|
|
and most peripheral post-collapse will be cobbled-up together anyway. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The goal is to give good starting point for as many *types* of peripherals |
|
|
|
possible. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It's also important to keep in mind that the goal of this OS is to program |
|
|
|
microcontrollers, so the type of peripherals it needs to support is limited |
|
|
|
to whatever is needed to interact with storage, serial links, display and |
|
|
|
receive text, do bit banging. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
## Open questions |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Futile? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For now, this is nothing more than an idea, and a fragile one. This project is |
|
|
|
only relevant if the collapse is of a specific magnitude. A weak-enough |
|
|
|
collapse and it's useless (just a few fabs that close down, a few wars here and |
|
|
|
there, hunger, disease, but people are nevertheless able to maintain current |
|
|
|
technology levels). A big enough collapse and it's even more useless (who needs |
|
|
|
microcontrollers when you're running away from cannibals). |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But if the collapse magnitude is right, then this project will change the |
|
|
|
course of our history, which makes it worth trying. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This idea is also fragile because it might not be feasible. It's also difficult |
|
|
|
to predict post-collapse conditions, so the "self-contained" part might fail |
|
|
|
and prove useless to many post-collapse communities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
But nevertheless, this idea seems too powerful to not try it. And even if it |
|
|
|
proves futile, it sounds like a lot of fun to try. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### 32-bit? 16-bit? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why go as far as 8-bit machines? There are some 32-bit ARM chips around that |
|
|
|
are protoboard-friendly. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First, because I think there are more scavenge-friendly 8-bit chips around than |
|
|
|
scavenge-friendly 16-bit or 32-bit chips. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Second, because those chips will be easier to replicate in a post-collapse fab. |
|
|
|
The z80 has 9000 transistors. 9000! Compared to the millions we have in any |
|
|
|
modern CPU, that's nothing! If the first chips we're able to create |
|
|
|
post-collapse have a low transistor count, we might as well design a system |
|
|
|
that works well on simpler chips. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
That being said, nothing stops the project from including the capability of |
|
|
|
programming an ARM or RISC-V chip. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Prior art |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I've spent some time doing software archeology and see if something that was |
|
|
|
already made could be used. There are some really nice and well-made programs |
|
|
|
out there, such as CP/M, but as far as I know (please, let me know if I'm wrong, |
|
|
|
I don't know this world very well), these old OS weren't made to be |
|
|
|
self-replicating. CP/M is now open source, but I don't think we can recompile |
|
|
|
CP/M from CP/M. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Then comes the idea of piggy-backing from an existing BASIC interpreter and |
|
|
|
make a shell out of it. Interesting idea, and using Grant Searle's modified |
|
|
|
nascom basic would be a good starting point, but I see two problems with this. |
|
|
|
First, the interpreter is already 8k. That's a lot. Second, it's |
|
|
|
copyright-ladden (by Searle *and* Microsoft) and can't be licensed as open |
|
|
|
source. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, maybe I'm working needlessly, but I'll start from scratch. But if someone |
|
|
|
has a hint about useful prior art, please let me know. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
### Risking ridicule |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why publish this hazy roadmap now and risk ridicule? Because I'm confident |
|
|
|
enough that I want to pour significant efforts into this in the next few years |
|
|
|
and because I have the intuition that it's feasible. I'm looking for early |
|
|
|
feedback and possibly collaboration. I don't have a formal electronic training, |
|
|
|
all my knowledge and experience come from fiddling as a hobbyist. If feasible |
|
|
|
and relevant (who knows, IPCC might tell us in 10 years "good job, humans! |
|
|
|
we've been up to the challenge! We've solved climate change!". Does this idea |
|
|
|
sound more or less crazy to you than what you've been reading in this text so |
|
|
|
far?), I will probably need help to pull this off. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
[searle]: http://searle.hostei.com/grant/z80/SimpleZ80.html |
|
|
|
[libz80]: https://github.com/ggambetta/libz80 |