dac@ukc.ac.uk (David Clear) (03/08/90)
I know Gemini doesn't work with TOS versions before 1.2. The question is, why? Is there any chance of Gemini ever being released for older TOS versions? I've seen it on a STE and it looks good. However, unless Atari feel like sending me Rainbow TOS free of charge, I haven't a hope of using it myself. Ugh... The pains of being a student with no money... Dave. -- % cc life.c | David Clear <dac@ukc.ac.uk> % a.out | Computer Science, University of Kent, Segmentation fault (core dumped) | Canterbury, England.
ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET (Julian Reschke) (03/10/90)
In article <2873@gos.ukc.ac.uk> David Clear writes: > I know Gemini doesn't work with TOS versions before 1.2. The question is, > why? Is there any chance of Gemini ever being released for older TOS versions? That's because GEMINI uses the BIOS character I/O vectors that were introduced in TOS 1.2. So there never will be a Gemini for TOS 1.2. However You CAN use MUPFEL.PRG (the standalone command shell) in conjunction with VENUS.PRG (the standalone desktop) on TOS 1.0. ___________________________ cut here _____________________________________ Julian F. Reschke, Hensenstr. 142, D-4400 Muenster, Phone: ++49 251 861241 eMail: ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET, "Julian Reschke" @ MAUS MS (++49 251 80386) ____________________ correct me if I'm wrong _____________________________
dac@ukc.ac.uk (David Clear) (03/11/90)
In article <9003091143.AA07771@freya.math.dmswwu> ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET (Julian Reschke) writes: [about why Gemini won't work with TOS < 1.2] > >That's because GEMINI uses the BIOS character I/O vectors that were >introduced in TOS 1.2... If some code was written to replace TRAP #13 (BIOS) with something that checked for character I/O function numbers and, if found, jumped through these new vectors (the vectors would, of course, initially point to the BIOS routines (or other routines which then called the BIOS)), would this allow GEMINI to work or is there more to it than that? Also, if this idea is possible, notes on how these new vectors work would be appreciated. Maybe I'm grossly oversimplifying things... Dave. -- % cc life.c | David Clear <dac@ukc.ac.uk> % a.out | Computer Science, University of Kent, Segmentation fault (core dumped) | Canterbury, England.
ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET (Julian Reschke) (03/20/90)
In article <2880@gos.ukc.ac.uk> David Clear writes: > > If some code was written to replace TRAP #13 (BIOS) with something that checke > for character I/O function numbers and, if found, jumped through these new > vectors (the vectors would, of course, initially point to the BIOS routines > (or other routines which then called the BIOS)), would this allow GEMINI to > work or is there more to it than that? > This COULD be done. But this would unnecessarely slow down the system. So why support this evil old TOS from the long-gone dark days? ___________________________ cut here _____________________________________ Julian F. Reschke, Hensenstr. 142, D-4400 Muenster, Phone: ++49 251 861241 eMail: ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET, "Julian Reschke" @ MAUS MS (++49 251 80386) ____________________ correct me if I'm wrong _____________________________
marshall@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au (Marshall Harris) (03/20/90)
In article <9003191155.AA17336@freya.math.dmswwu> ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET (Julian Reschke) writes: >In article <2880@gos.ukc.ac.uk> David Clear writes: >> >This COULD be done. But this would unnecessarely slow down the system. So >why support this evil old TOS from the long-gone dark days? >___________________________ cut here _____________________________________ >Julian F. Reschke, Hensenstr. 142, D-4400 Muenster, Phone: ++49 251 861241 >eMail: ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET, "Julian Reschke" @ MAUS MS (++49 251 80386) >____________________ correct me if I'm wrong _____________________________ Support the old devil, because there are some of us who can't afford to buy a new TOS! Internet/CSnet: marshall@uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au ||Dept.of Computer Science Bitnet: marshall%uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au@uunet.uu.net ||University of Queensland UUCP: uunet!munnari!uqcspe.cs.uq.oz.au!marshall ||St Lucia, Queensland 4067 << ph: +61 7 377 2909 || fax: +61 7 371 0783 >> || Australia
wwm@pmsmam.uucp (Bill Meahan) (03/21/90)
In article <9003191155.AA17336@freya.math.dmswwu> ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET (Julian Reschke) writes: >In article <2880@gos.ukc.ac.uk> David Clear writes: >> >> If some code was written to replace TRAP #13 (BIOS) with something that checke >> for character I/O function numbers and, if found, jumped through these new >> vectors (the vectors would, of course, initially point to the BIOS routines >> (or other routines which then called the BIOS)), would this allow GEMINI to >> work or is there more to it than that? >> >This COULD be done. But this would unnecessarely slow down the system. So >why support this evil old TOS from the long-gone dark days? >___________________________ cut here _____________________________________ >Julian F. Reschke, Hensenstr. 142, D-4400 Muenster, Phone: ++49 251 861241 >eMail: ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET, "Julian Reschke" @ MAUS MS (++49 251 80386) >____________________ correct me if I'm wrong _____________________________ Because most of us still don't have anything newer than 1.0! Seriously, why not a 'separate' version with the software emulation for the 'oldies' out here? A few #ifdef's would allow a common set of source and those with the newer ROMs could take full advantage of them while those of us who can't upgrade now could still get the advantages of Gemini albeit with lower performance. BTW, I REALLY LIKE the idea of merging something like Gemini with RTX or some similar multi-tasking system. Sigh, just think if we could have X11R4 ... -- Bill Meahan | UUCP: uunet!mailrus!umich!pmsmam!wwm | snail: 128 Factory St., Ypsilanti, MI 48197 #include <disclaimer.std> | voice: +1 313 484 9320 /* witty */ |packet: wa8tzg @ wa8ooh.mi.usa.na