NewsForumsCodeLogsGallerySpecsSearch

Sony PS3 - Linux?

BlitzMax Forums/BlitzMax Programming/Sony PS3 - Linux?

FirstTheIdea(Posted 2006) [#1]
Is there any chance of Max being complied to run on PS3? as you can install PowerPC version Linux on there very easly.

How to install Linux on PS3.
http://ps3.qj.net/PS3-Linux-The-void-has-been-filled-Full-install-instructions-for-Fedora-Core-5-/pg/49/aid/73144


Dreamora(Posted 2006) [#2]
If you have:

1. GCC 3.3 for that Linux running correctly
2. Hardware drivers für the graphics units

Then yes it should be possible to compile it.
But it won't be of much use I fear. The compiled executables only work on a CPU wise similar architecture ... this means nearly none ...


ImaginaryHuman(Posted 2006) [#3]
You'd have to have an OpenGL driver that supports the ps3 hardware. And it's only going to use one of the cpu's, you would only get about 1/8th the cpu power unless the ps3's os (or linux) could let you do processes or something to split the workload.


Dreamora(Posted 2006) [#4]
The syntetic side processors are not nearly as powerfull as the main cpu so you have more than 1/8th but you wouldn't have any parallel running stuff like on multicore X86


ImaginaryHuman(Posted 2006) [#5]
I expect linux handles the multi processing thing, so you could run several max apps at once, one on each core thing?


Punksmurf(Posted 2006) [#6]
The PS3 'side-cores' only can process one bunch of commands in a line. They are ideal for things that are always the same like rendering, but not suitable for applications.

but you wouldn't have any parallel running stuff like on multicore X86

with bMax, you don't have that on a mutlicore x86 either :(


Dreamora(Posted 2006) [#7]
Not fully true. Don't ask me why, but at least on windows if you use GCC 3.4.2 upwards, you get CPU usage of 60-80 percent on a dual core system, so at least the GCC side is capable of putting some stuff into its own thread. (the app was mainly a math test app, so nothing like ENet or the like).

Main problem is just, that BM is targeted at GCC 3.1.0.1 which doesn't do that as it is just too many years old.

PS: no I do not know why it goes above 50% usage, but I accept that it does ^^


Punksmurf(Posted 2006) [#8]
That's weird, at least to me. Plus there is no way you can affect this behaviour, by writing your own threads.


Dreamora(Posted 2006) [#9]
Yupp definitiv.
Would be great if we had some control and multithreading, even if Mutex based.
The only way to currently do something like this is multiple processes and interaction through network communication. (the pipe is nice but it is a blocking access so no acceptable solution)


popcade(Posted 2006) [#10]
I must say

"HERE WE GO AGAIN!!"

Such questions I saw from
"Make PS2 Game with Blitz"
"Make GBA/GP32 Game with Blitz"
"Make PSP Game wit Blitz"
"Make XBox Game with Blitz"
"Make 360 Game with Blitz"

...any more?


Punksmurf(Posted 2006) [#11]
I think bMax is a good language to make the transition from classic, procedural basic to clean object oriented programming. When you reach that point, learning a new syntax and a few new concepts isn't that much of a problem (only if you want to, of course - I know I don't) so... if you want to write games on any platform, first see if you can handle bMax to the fullest, then switch to c++ and then make the transition to your favorite platform(s).

Anyway, that's my point of view.


Now, why can't bMax be used on any platform?

I must say I do not have a complete understanding of these issues, but anyway it works something like this. Anybody please fill me in where I am missing something.

Aside from an OpenGL implementation that might be lacking, the architecture of a system also plays a role. To make an (hopefully) obvious statement: a z80 does not understand x86 instructions. This holds true also for the 'bigger' processors: a powerPC doesn't understand x86 instructions and vice versa.

Then, of course, there is the operating system which asks for a certain design of your program.

Now, bMax is designed for different combinations of architecture and OS. It supports x86-architecture for Windows, Linux and MacOS and the PowerPC-architecture for MacOS.

Since PowerPC and Linux are supported, it might not be such a problem to support this combination, but it can also bring a lot of trouble since Linux is not MacOS and PowerPC is not x86. So I wouldn't count on such a combination being supported, at least not officially.

This is as complete as I can be... I hope it's enough to understand why you cannot create PS3 programs with bMax :)


popcade(Posted 2006) [#12]
Bid millions to BRL and Mark will write a BMax/PS3 for anyone who paid.


Punksmurf(Posted 2006) [#13]
Hell, of course he will. If you'll pay me millions and I'll make you a compiler. I'll even try doing so standing on my head, if you like.


Dreamora(Posted 2006) [#14]
the main problem here already is: Linux support for PPC is already massively lacking. Compared to the software and packages you get for X86 trying to use Linux on a regular G4 / G5 can become a real pain unless you are a gentoo-iast or the like (ie compile your OS yourself from ground up).
This even holds for much used distributions like Ubuntu / Kubuntu.
And trying to use BM within that environment can become even harder as BM has explicit dependancies to outdated libraries and applications anywhere outside OSX. (on Windows even worse, where GCC 3.1 is needed. Linux at least uses GCC 3.3)