Looking 4 utilities

Looking 4 utilities

Post by Zoupla » Thu, 14 Oct 2004 02:04:22

Hello, I'm looking for some misc oric utilities mainly to

- convert cc65 binaries into tap files
- convert GIF files to oric's screen graphic format (goal : create
"sprites" and backgrounds)
- use my PC as tape reader (with wav files sampled from oric tapes, if I
find the courage to do it). I mean audio out --> Oric's DIN

I've tried on oric.org but found nothing


Looking 4 utilities

Post by Jede » Thu, 14 Oct 2004 04:36:00


cc65 already adds header when you compile



Looking 4 utilities

Post by Zoupla » Thu, 14 Oct 2004 06:44:15

"Jede" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > a rit dans le message de

Really ? You mean ... cl65 -t oric (or atmos I don't remember because I
never tried... I justed used cc65 for apple II code) and cc65 linker add the
needed header on the bin file ?

So it's just usable "as is" with oric emulator ?

Looking 4 utilities

Post by drhirud » Thu, 14 Oct 2004 14:33:15

Yes, I used it for writing the MazezaM port to Oric. The previous
versions of CC65 had a bug which prevented automatic loading of the
tapes with AmOric (not exact calculation of the end address, so I
wrote a tiny C program to fix it), but this bug was fixed in the
latest CC65 builds. Here is the code I use for assembler files, when
coding with dasm for example:

processor 6502

ORIGIN = $2000 ;Can be any other.
;(including $400, but this will give Fabrice
headaches :)

org ORIGIN-14

.byte $16,$16,$16,$24
.byte $00,$00,$80,$00
.byte #>End,#<End,#>ORIGIN,#<ORIGIN
.byte $00,$00
incbin FILE ;Or your asm code here.

$16,$16,$16,$24 are the synchro bytes. $80 is for autostart.


Looking 4 utilities

Post by Mickael Po » Sun, 17 Oct 2004 02:08:42

> Thank you for your answer

Actually PictConv don't support GIF (it's a mistake on the website I forgot
to remove), but it accepts PNG or TGA.


Well, PictConv can generate directly TAP files (with or without a basic
program to load the picture on screen).
Depends of what you really want to do.


Looking 4 utilities

Post by Zoupla » Sun, 17 Oct 2004 06:42:47

"Mickael Pointier" < XXXX@XXXXX.COM > a rit dans le message de

I really don't know for now. I'm currently slowly returning to 8 bits and
experimenting network programming on Apple II (maybe pingable soon, at least
I hope). But it's not too fun even if interesting.
I would prefer to code a small game (adventure tile based one) and have two
choices :
- on apple II : pro = disk drive, real hardware seems to be ok (my II GS),
ease of use, serial line / cons = too many good games done during golden
age, don't find apple II users so "cool" do they care about something new ?
- on oric : pro = small active human community / cons = can't rely on floppy
, is real hardware able to operate ? (two orics, one is half dead, the
other seems to be ok, but "seems" only), testing code on real Oric is more
tedious (slow PC->Oric transfer)

Of course emulators are THE solution for testing, but if the only one I
prefer to give up and do some actionscript programming with Macromedia Flash

In both cases, I wonder which machine have the worst color coding scheme ?
Apple II games looks ugly even if they are really great (mean fun to play).
I don't remember well Oric games (didn't run an Oric game on TV screen since
1986). What I mean is "both are not able to produce cool colors like the one
I can see on NES games"

But no matter I would, or course, prefer to code on Oric as this is the
first computer I had and I'm still thinking it was a really good machine.

Looking 4 utilities

Post by Shmurt » Wed, 20 Oct 2004 04:17:03

Le Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:42:47 +0200, Zouplaz s'exprimait:

Some games depend a lot on graphics and sounds, but I remember a strong
*** ion to Manic miner and Insect insanity I had, and the graphics were
not so good.

The BEST oxymoron: Microsoft Works?