Re: [MiNT] New MiNT distribution is [long]

[Stefan Berndtsson <stefan@nocrew.org>]

Katherine Ellis <kellis@fdn.com> writes:

> > I don't say the drivers are for linux/68k.
> > I don't say the drivers work in linux/68k.
> > I don't say the drivers work on anything else but x86-based systems as of now.
> > 
> > I _do_ say that linux has better support for the cards.
> >                 ^^^^^
> 
> ok so if you are talking about linux and not linux68k for PCI cards and
> such, so I then could answer: Windows95 has better support than linux. SO
> what? 

Ever heard of source code?

> Right, ok, I think we just happen to be on 1 architecture (m68k), so could
> we stick to that? I might then follow what you want to say.

No, _you_ could stick to whatever you like. I claim linux is a viable
choice as a base for expandning use of MiNT, _just_ because there is
source available that can be reused for that purpose.

> > I'm saying there are drivers available for use by whoever wants to use
> > them, because they are released with source code that can be read and
> > modified by anyone with an editor and a compiler.
> 
> hmm driver is architecture dependent, you don't access the graphics, the
> same way on a falcon or hades, so I really don't see the relation. 
> Linux is not as generic as you seem to make us believe.

Why can't you people read before you answer?
I did not say it would work. I said specifically that I did not say that.
I say it can be used to make it work.

> Heck, TC mode on falcon is not even supported with linux68k.

Yes it is.

> If it is to rewrite the drivers (for those who have their src free to
> use), what's the difference? could rewrite them for mint/magic as well.

Hello???? That's exactly my point. The entire thing is about rewriting
things for mint, using Linux (or something else with source) as a base
because it has better support for the things you want, and therefor
you do not need to rewrite the entire code, you need to modify existing
code.

> If a manufacturer gives the specs, and if enough atari users are
> interested in the hardware, a driver will be done. (just like what
> happened with cdrom writers, scanners, video cards) In TOS.
> 
> Linux68k is in the same situation as MiNT/TOS, If the manufacturer doesn't
> want to give specs, you're screwed. 
> While this is not true with linuxi86, as binaries are florishing.

No, you're absolutely not screwed. Here is where you miss the issue.
Lots of times before has drivers been written for x86 using reverse-engineering,
with non-existing specs.

Regardless of what the manufacturer wants to give out, those drivers are
there, in place source, for you to read and modify.

> > 
> > This also goes for the free BSD-based systems, where such code is present
> > as well.
> > 
> > I'm not saying MiNT has these drivers. I'm not saying MiNT could read the modules.
> > I do not understand what it is that's so hard to understand about the fact that
> > I claim: "Linux has better support than MiNT [for PCI-based cards]".
> 
> Yes, I can also claim:
> 
> Linux has better support than linux68k.

Yes, which is also part of the point.

> Windows has better support than Linux. 

Yes, which is absolutely pointless.

> Quite simple to understand.

yes