Re: [MiNT] Shutdown() discussion

[Petr Stehlik <joy@sophics.cz>]

On Wed, 2003-12-10 at 16:45, Odd Skancke wrote:
>  Okie, more NatFeat specific code? Or how does the kernel's
> cookie-to-private code knows what the different cookies mean?
>  Yes, confused in that I didnt think the kernel should copy stuff from
> pointers it knows not what is. Unless you plan to add if (cookie.tag =
> __NF) copy... to the kerne code. Now we're cooking, eh?

IMHO FreeMiNT should generate the NF cookie and the rest of NF cookie
structure and code by itself and not rely on the old one provided by TOS
since there might be no TOS (wasn't there a plan to bootstrap MiNT?). As
soon as FreeMiNT can create the NF cookie and stuff it can easily create
as many private copies of it as needed.

This generating of private NF cookies could be disabled for now until
the VM really starts working.

> Fine and dandy, but change ARAnyM instead of changing the software to
> make things work.

I answered this in another e-mail (hint: aranym is not an emulator of
existing hardware). Besides that, kernel is a special case of software.
It's not a thing (like an application) that should run on any piece of
hardware without customizing. Actually that's the kernel's job - to
provide environment for all applications and allow them to make the best
use of the available hardware.

> ShockHorror, CT60 really made it!

Frankly, I didn't believe in 2000 that CT60 would make it. I am pleased
to see it actually works and most of my friends have bought it already.

> This means that plans are to make MiNT
> more and more emulation-friendly. Can you promise me that this wont
> happen?

This is really interesting point. You want me to promise that we stop
developing new features. You want yourself to stay back in 20th century
and not follow the progress of other computer platforms. Well, I can't
promise you that we stop the development - although I can tell you that
my today's disappointment is bigger than usually.

Petr