From owner-mint@fishpool.com Sun Mar 23 15:56:40 2003 Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2003 15:49:21 +0100 (CET) From: Standa Opichal X-X-Sender: stop@mail.idoox.com To: mint@fishpool.com Subject: Re: [MiNT] [CVS] Xaaes in freemint module In-Reply-To: <20030322155630.A3975@verin.klockars.net> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Virus-Scanned: by AMaViS Delivered-To: mint@fishpool.com Delivered-To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: opichals@seznam.cz Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-ID: X-List-ID: Hi1 On Sat, 22 Mar 2003, Johan Klockars wrote: > > > > No, it depend at the moment on some kernel source. It's also planned from > > > > me to integrate XaAES much better with FreeMiNT. So it's part of the > > > > > > IMO, that is a really bad idea. But that might just be me. > > > > Can you also explain why? > > I'm generally against integration, and integrating the kernel with > what is really an application (albeit a somewhat special one, with > kernel type entry calls (for now)) seems even less appropriate. Well, the AES (as well as VDI) appears to me as a part of the OS if you look on TOS itself. Anyway a kernel module would just improve the way thing are done in the XaAES. Just as Henk wrote in the other mail. > Perhaps more importantly, XaAES is not necessarily tied to MiNT. > Sure, it relies on MiNT right now, but in the future Fenix might > become viable, or someone might want to make XaAES run native on some > emulator, or do a variant that does not require multi-tasking, or... I think that we are about to keep the independency on the requred level for all this beeing possible. > > I only see lot of ugly hacks in the kernel for the AESSYS to get it > > working properly. > > Are you talking about current hacks? Yes, what kind of hacks Frank? > Surely those must remain in place to allow N.AES and MultiTOS to work? Hmm? best regards STan