Re: New file system IDs and others.

[Katherine L Ellis <kellis@primenet.com>]

On Sat, 27 Jun 1998, Julian Reschke-FJR010 wrote:

>I don't think anybody said that MiNT *needs* the MagiC shared lib
>scheme.
well, not obviously, but somewhat it was pointed out that we should
look into that. 

>
>> compatibility reason? We haveto stay clear, and know what we want, do
>> we want magic compatibility with their own way of doing? or more
>> likely to be closest to unix shared lib? Are the unix shared lib even
>> thinkable on atari? if yes, why did magic adopt their own? What is
>> stoping us to use more standard way of doing?
>
>Nothing. Do it. Go ahead.
I was expecting something more like what Howard answered, some details
on what/why/how. Not a simple "Do it, go ahead".

>
>> Handle Background DMA like in magic? "magic does it already blah blah
>> with Hddriver blah" , Does it even work in the so perfect Magic OS?
>> OS of the excellence. I have read and did try myslef. That ain't
>> working well at all. Many / most of the people have this option
>> disabled as it is way too slow.
>
>That might be the case. However it's definitively not the fault
>of the interface MagiC is using for this.
Where is the problem coming from then? HDDRIVER? I don't understand.
Why would we support Background DMA the magic way, if even in magic it
doesn't even work properly.

>
>>...
>> 
>> Why is pexec reacting differently from magic to mint? what is the
>
>Does it? Some modes are missing, but besides that?
Read anthonyj comments on that. It is definitaly NOT compatible. make
a prog with pexec 100. and run it in magic and mint. see if it is the
same. 

>
>> purpose? won't that create compatibility problem? YES it will, it has.
>> 
>> I mean come on, shouldn't we try to direct MiNT kernal toward
>> something a little bit more robust? following posix threads for
>> example, EVEN if it has to be NOT compatible with magic. I don't care
>> about magic.
>
>MagiC's threads rely on the MagiC AES, so it's obviously not a good
>choice for MiNT. However I don't get why compatibilty between MiNT
>and MagiC isn't useful. I sure want to run my code on both operating
>systems.
Yes, I agree with you, I want them to be compaible. Hence my remarks
on the NON compatibility coming from magic mostly. For simple things,
and from old standard, Magic had to change that to its own sauce. It
wasn't necessary. In this case, why don't we change the behaviour of
mint pexec, At least it will be compatible. I don't care if the change
has to come from mint or magic, But it seems to me that magic is not
helping the situation. IF magic has some extras, that are not even
implemented in mint, that's perfectly understandable that
compatibility can't be full. However once again, for simple things
like ob flags, pexec etc, This we shouldn't have to worry about.

>
>So what? I am happy that I can go ahead and write a vfatconf ttp 
>that will run on both systems.
Yes, I wish it was like that, and yes, TTP makes things much simpler.
Don't get me wrong, I DO want magic compatibility. But seems MiNT has
to follow magic own way of doing. 
If a program is a magic only, I perfectly understand and accept if it
is because it uses some extra special features, such as pthread that
mint doesn't have. I can live with that very well. "Don't have it?
can't do it :)"  However some stupid design such as Gemjin requiring
Wdialog!  That's the weirdest thing I ever seen. Or NVDI tools needing
Wdialog, (that kind of concept is above me). Gemjin is supposed to be
a sound/music program. There are not even no special popup, submenu,
drag and drop userdef obj, no nothing, And YET it needs Wdialog.
That's the kind of thing I don't agree with Magic philosophy most of
the time, Well Might not be magic fault, but programers doing soft for
it. (so andreas is probably not the guilty one).

>> Magic if it doesn't bring anything good? am I missing something
>> obvious?
>
>Seems so. 
heheh , you are not a very good sales person. Tell me the real goods
of magic. Might enlighten me.

Please, Lets have MiNT to follow Magic, YES, but if it is worth it.
Making MiNT to be magic would be a mistake, a very big mistake.
If shared lib implementation in magic is good, see genious. ok, GOOD,
let's follow that. But let's not just do that because magic has, mint
has to have it, for the sake of compatibility. 

________________________________________________________________________________
Email:Kellis@primenet.com
Web http://www.primenet.com/~kellis/
________________________________________________________________________________