From owner-mint@fishpool.com Mon Jun 23 13:49:32 2003 Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 13:43:40 +0200 (CEST) From: Standa Opichal X-X-Sender: stop@mail.idoox.com To: Frank Naumann cc: mint@fishpool.com Subject: Re: [MiNT] fVDI TTF issues In-Reply-To: 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: Hi! On Mon, 23 Jun 2003, Frank Naumann wrote: > The trap#X are not interrupt request. This are traps, also called system > calls. > > The difference: interrupts happen asynchronous; normally comming from > I/O devices; traps happen synchronous, called from processes. From the > technical handling this is a big, big difference. OK, sorry for that confusion. So with this in regard I thought just about VDI syscalls. > > I'm loading the fVDI from the rc.local script. But it is usable even if > > you execute it before in the AUTO folder (this is done in afros - see the > > ARAnyM downloads for more details). > > I don't think this is the right way. Which one? AUTO or the rc.local one? Probably none ... right? ;) > > I would rather assume to get fVDI into the kernel space as soon as we can. > > Yes, that's the best (also an parallel version for TOS/MagiC should be no > problem; the differences are small I think). I thought the same way here. regards STan