[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: MiNT goes UNiX, invitation for mailing list

To: entropy@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu (Nicholas S Castellano)
Subject: Re: MiNT goes UNiX, invitation for mailing list
From: itschere@TechFak.Uni-Bielefeld.DE
Date: Tue, 11 Jan 94 11:13:23 MET
Cc: mint@atari.archive.umich.edu
In-reply-to: <199401110850.DAA23606@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>; from "Nicholas S Castellano" at Jan 11, 94 03:50:07 am

> However, if compatibility and source code consistency are the desired
> results of this project, I'd say that the creation of a splinter
> version of the MiNTlibs is a really lousy idea.

 When I started the whole idea, I wasn't thinking of a new MiNTlib at all.
I can't see why anybody should really want to abandon this trail. I don't
want to melt UNiX and/or Linux68k and MiNT together, I just wanted to
get a consensus on a bit more standard, and I won't need new Libs for
that, so I agree.

TeSche
-- 
PS: If the above written looks weird, then that's probably because it _IS_.
Torsten Scherer (Schiller, TeSche...), University of Bielefeld, Germany
==> itschere@techfak.uni-bielefeld.de / tesche@hrz.uni-bielefeld.de <==

References:
- MiNT goes UNiX, invitation for mailing list (MINTOS)
  - From: "Nicholas S Castellano" <entropy@terminator.rs.itd.umich.edu>

Prev by Date: Re: call for discussion: Standard paths for MiNT
Next by Date: Re: call for discussion: Standard paths for MiNT
Previous by thread: MiNT goes UNiX, invitation for mailing list (MINTOS)
Next by thread: Re: MiNT goes UNiX, invitation for mailing list (MINTOS)
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread