Re: [MiNT] Shutdown() discussion

["Adam Klobukowski" <atari@gabo.pl>]

> Selon Petr Stehlik <joy@sophics.cz>:
> > > *However* I see now that natfeat is also to be accepted on real
> > machines, ?? what real machines are going to accept it?
> 
> I was kidding when I wrote that we could support natfeat on CT60. I
> hope nobody took this seriously.

O, but the _real_ subject of how Shutdown() should behave was missed.

I once again ask you. Please read my previoust post about proposals 
how Shutdown() should behave.

Short:
On machines that can Poweroff, Halt, means Poweroff, only in debug 
mode Halt means really Halt.

Pros: comptibility with other OSes/platforms (Linux atleast).
Cons: no Halt if no in debug mode.

Everyone, please state your opinion about it. Not where and when it 
should work, but _how_.

At this time I know only one opinion, mine opinion and I'm willing to 
tweak kernel to satisfy my needs ;)

Aditionally I'm thinking about introducing new #define into kernel: 
CT60, marking CT60 only code, on by default.
That brings possibility to #define also ARAnyM for ARAnyM code off by 
default.

Does that makes everyone happy?

--
Semper Fidelis

Adam Klobukowski
atari@gabo.pl