uace0@menudo.uh.edu (ATARI Computer Enthusiasts) (05/25/91)
I suggest that if anyone wishes to do research on stealing vectors, then they should save themselves A LOT of wasted time and get the document "The eleven commandments for taking vectors" (Or some such title) by Charles Johnson. Many many hours have been spent researching this subject, and PROVEN techniques and guidelines are given in this document. Follow the rules outlined in the guide and you will have hours of vector stealing enjoyment! :-) - mike -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Double Click Me | Double Click Software | P.O. Box 741206 | Houston, Tx, 77274 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Voice: (713)977-6520 | DC DESKTOP | DC FORMATTER | DC UTILITIES | and others
ant@mks.com (Anthony Howe) (05/28/91)
So could some kind soul repost the "11 Commandment to stealing vectors" or mail me a copy. -- ant@mks.com Anthony C Howe Mortice Kern Systems Inc. 35 King St. N., Waterloo, Ontario, Canada, N2J 6W9 "Fate favors fools, small children, and ships named Enterprise" - Riker
ZVD007@DMSWWU1C.BITNET (Ulrich Kuehn) (05/28/91)
In article <1991May25.164250.5204@menudo.uh.edu>, uace0@menudo.uh.edu (ATARI Computer Enthusiasts) says: > >I suggest that if anyone wishes to do research on stealing vectors, then >they should save themselves A LOT of wasted time and get the document >"The eleven commandments for taking vectors" (Or some such title) by >Charles Johnson. Many many hours have been spent researching this subject, >and PROVEN techniques and guidelines are given in this document. There is the XBRA-method for stealing vectors; it should ALLWAYS be used because it allows to detect all programs in the chain, so one can find viruses and others of that kind. In my opinion, the only cause not to use it is given in a prophylactic; so, if a program does nothing in that way, it should use XBRA. U.Kuehn
cmedley@wam.umd.edu (Charles Henry Medley) (05/30/91)
I have been unable to find out the exact specs on the "Cookie Jar" method for vector stealing. I was wondering if anyone could give me a description... is this just the XBRA protocol?
uace0@menudo.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) (05/30/91)
In article <1991May29.190047.15959@wam.umd.edu> cmedley@wam.umd.edu (Charles Henry Medley) writes: > >I have been unable to find out the exact specs on the "Cookie Jar" method for >vector stealing. I was wondering if anyone could give me a description... is >this just the XBRA protocol? Sorry, Flip! The 'Cookie Jar' is not XBRA, or even remotely similar. And, unfortunately, you can not get the information concerning the cooking jar unless you are a developer (go tier 1 support and you'll get it). See you at WAACE! :-) - mike -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Double Click Me | Double Click Software | P.O. Box 741206 | Houston, Tx, 77274 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Voice: (713)977-6520 | DC DESKTOP | DC FORMATTER | DC UTILITIES | and others
nico@cs.ruu.nl (Nico Verwer) (05/30/91)
In <1991May29.234238.24892@menudo.uh.edu> uace0@menudo.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) writes: >Sorry, Flip! The 'Cookie Jar' is not XBRA, or even remotely similar. >And, unfortunately, you can not get the information concerning the cooking >jar unless you are a developer (go tier 1 support and you'll get it). If this is so, why should I use the cooking jar? I guess there are many people like me, who ocasionally write a program which needs to steal a vector. If Atari refuses to make the specification of the cooking jar PD, it is better to use the XBRA standard, which is well documented and PD. I don't understand why Atari releases the "how to steal a vector" specification only to registered developers. Is this to ``protect'' commercial developers against PD software? I think this is bad policy, because it makes people write badly behaving programs. I really need to write a vector stealing program myself, since there are no programs supporting my SilentWriter LC-800, and I am not going to hire a registered developer to write a printer driver for it. When I first wrote a program which needed to steal a vector, I first disassembled a few PD programs, to see how they did it. Then I just imitated this. Now I have got the XBRA specification, with an example using it in Turbo C, and my vector-stealing programs behave correctly with respect to XBRA. -- Nico Verwer | nico@cs.ruu.nl Dept. of Computer Science, University of Utrecht | phone: +31 30 533921 p.o. box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands | fax: +31 30 513791
uace0@menudo.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) (05/30/91)
In article <1991May30.115257.19816@cs.ruu.nl> nico@cs.ruu.nl (Nico Verwer) writes: >If this is so, why should I use the cooking jar? I guess there are many >people like me, who ocasionally write a program which needs to steal a >vector. If Atari refuses to make the specification of the cooking jar >PD, it is better to use the XBRA standard, which is well documented and >PD. Ooops... It's supposed to be the "COOKIE JAR" not cooking... :-) The cookie jar is an attempt to allow resident programs to leave a memory resident 'cookie' uniquely identifying that application for any other application which is aware of it, in one common location. Then, a longword following the unique ID can point to some application specific routine/ structure/whatever, or the longword can mean something itself. The 'cookies' are stored in a table which you can add/delete or change. >I don't understand why Atari releases the "how to steal a vector" >specification only to registered developers. Is this to ``protect'' You misunderstood me, so let me make myself clearer: ATARI DID NOT RELEASE THE 11 COMMANDMENTS FOR TAKING VECTORS! Charles F. Johnson (CodeHead and Little Green Footballs Software) did! As far as I know, Atari has never sanctioned that methods described, altho the methods described are widely accepted and practiced. I would GUESS that since Atari is aware of these practices, they will attempt to keep them working as long as possible in all future TOS/GEM revisions (IMHO). >-- >Nico Verwer | nico@cs.ruu.nl >Dept. of Computer Science, University of Utrecht | phone: +31 30 533921 >p.o. box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands | fax: +31 30 513791 - mike -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Double Click Me | Double Click Software | P.O. Box 741206 | Houston, Tx, 77274 ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Voice: (713)977-6520 | DC DESKTOP | DC FORMATTER | DC UTILITIES | and others
neil@cs.hw.ac.uk (Neil Forsyth) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May30.115257.19816@cs.ruu.nl> nico@cs.ruu.nl (Nico Verwer) writes: >... If Atari refuses to make the specification of the cooking jar >PD, it is better to use the XBRA standard, which is well documented and >PD. Atari UK have said that it is OK for developers to talk about the contents of 'release notes'. The definition for the Cookie Jar protocol is in the STE TOS Release Notes so I guess we can talk away ... >Nico Verwer | nico@cs.ruu.nl >Dept. of Computer Science, University of Utrecht | phone: +31 30 533921 >p.o. box 80.089, 3508 TB Utrecht, The Netherlands | fax: +31 30 513791 +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+ ! DISCLAIMER:Unless otherwise stated, the above comments are entirely my own ! ! ! ! "I think all right thinking people in this country are sick and tired of ! ! being told that ordinary decent people are fed up in this country with ! ! being sick and tired. I'm certainly not and I'm sick and tired of being ! ! told that I am!" - Monty Python ! ! ! ! Neil Forsyth JANET: neil@uk.ac.hw.cs ! ! Dept. of Computer Science ARPA: neil@cs.hw.ac.uk ! ! Heriot-Watt University UUCP: ..!ukc!cs.hw.ac.uk!neil ! ! Edinburgh, Scotland, UK ! +----------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Julian F. Reschke <ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET> (05/31/91)
In article <1991May29.234238.24892@menudo.uh.edu>, uace0@menudo.uh.edu (Michael B. Vederman) says: > >Sorry, Flip! The 'Cookie Jar' is not XBRA, or even remotely similar. > >And, unfortunately, you can not get the information concerning the cooking >jar unless you are a developer (go tier 1 support and you'll get it). Huh? The cookie jar is documented in the STE TOS Release Notes, and as far as I know, it is _allowed_ to publish informations found in recent release notes (as opposed to documentation about future operating system features). ___________________________ cut here _____________________________________ Julian F. Reschke, Hensenstr. 142, D-4400 Muenster, Phone: ++49 251 861241 fast eMail: ONM07@DMSWWU1A.BITNET, slow: jr@ms.maus.de (++49 251 77216) ____________________ correct me if I'm wrong _____________________________
Roger.Sheppard@actrix.gen.nz (Roger Sheppard) (05/31/91)
In article <1991May29.190047.15959@wam.umd.edu> cmedley@wam.umd.edu (Charles Henry Medley) writes: > > I have been unable to find out the exact specs on the "Cookie Jar" method for > vector stealing. I was wondering if anyone could give me a description... is > this just the XBRA protocol? Why not buy the the Level 2 Developers Pack, about $125 US from what I here this is worth every cent, at least this is one thing that Atari has now done right, Thanks Atari.. -- *** Roger W. Sheppard * Roger.Sheppard@bbs.actrix.gen.nz *** *** 85 Donovan Rd * * At least I don't Flicker, not *** *** Kapiti New Zealand.. * like a dying light globe. ! ***
mbaker@ucs.adelaide.edu.au (Matthew Baker) (06/01/91)
From article <1991May31.122027.26217@actrix.gen.nz>, by Roger.Sheppard@actrix.gen.nz (Roger Sheppard): > Why not buy the the Level 2 Developers Pack, about $125 US from what I here > this is worth every cent, at least this is one thing that Atari has > now done right, Thanks Atari.. > -- > *** Roger W. Sheppard * Roger.Sheppard@bbs.actrix.gen.nz *** > *** 85 Donovan Rd * * At least I don't Flicker, not *** > *** Kapiti New Zealand.. * like a dying light globe. ! *** Can anyone give some more details on this stratification of the developer system??? -Having previosly been asked some OZ$600 for a dev kit, this 'bargain basement' registration sounds ideal... Matthew
briant@tsltor.uucp (Brian Taylor) (06/04/91)
In article <1991May31.122027.26217@actrix.gen.nz> Roger.Sheppard@actrix.gen.nz (Roger Sheppard) writes: >Why not buy the the Level 2 Developers Pack, about $125 US from what I here >this is worth every cent, at least this is one thing that Atari has >now done right, Thanks Atari.. No thanks Atari Canada. About two years ago now, I was becoming seriously interested in developing for my ST on my off hours, and sent away to Atari Canada requesting information on obtaining developer kits of *any* sort. I received back a mailer thanking me for my request and requesting I fill in about a 3 page prospectus on my business plans (i.e., exactly what product I intended to develop, in what marketplace, what time frame, etc.). Well, being a bit taken aback, I thought for a while and replied that I was a professional software developer with a university degree in CS and had several ideas for products but couldn't commit to everything they asked for. After mailing and waiting some two weeks, I received a "sorry, but we must only give developer kits to those who can completely specify their plans, etc but buy the Sybex books if you need information." PHOOEY! Needless to say I wasn't impressed; I was willing to pay the $$ for the kit and to do some development work on the ST, but they shot me dead before I had the chance. The moral: Not all Atari outfits are created equal. I knew at the time that the US folks were getting developer packs for their cost with no song and dance. *Sigh* Live and learn, Atari! - Brian -- Brian Taylor briant@tsltor.uucp UNIX Systems Administrator (...jtsv16!tsltor!briant) Teleride Sage Ltd. (416) 596-1940
ele9110@cdc835.cdc.polimi.it (Massimo Oluzzi) (06/05/91)
briant@tsltor.uucp (Brian Taylor) writes: >In article <1991May31.122027.26217@actrix.gen.nz> Roger.Sheppard@actrix.gen.nz (Roger Sheppard) writes: >>Why not buy the the Level 2 Developers Pack, about $125 US from what I here >>this is worth every cent, at least this is one thing that Atari has >>now done right, Thanks Atari.. >No thanks Atari Canada. About two years ago now, I was becoming seriously >interested in developing for my ST (...) (...) >After mailing and waiting some two weeks, I received a "sorry, but we must >only give developer kits to those who can completely specify their plans, etc >but buy the Sybex books if you need information." PHOOEY! (...) I think it's the same situation we have in Italy. "Atari Italia" sells its Development Kit only to professional software-houses, so there is no hope for the non-commercial developer. I think they would sell many more machines if more documentation was available! Can anybody out there help us ?!!! Bye, Massimo Oluzzi ele9110@cdc835.cdc.polimi.it
jgp@fct.unl.pt (Jose Goncalo Pedro) (06/05/91)
Please, can someone tell me what are those those developers packs, i.e., what do they have and how much do they cost (and if they are any good, or what are they good for :-)). By the way, if someone from Portugal is reading this, are they available in here (where? sparc? sparti???) thanks -jp -- Jose Goncalo Pedro BITNET/Internet: jgp@fct.unl.pt +---------------------------------+ UUCP: jgp@unl.uucp | Departamento de Informatica +----------------------------------+ | Universidade Nova de Lisboa 2825 Monte Caparica, PORTUGAL | +--------------------------------------------------------------------+