From fnaumann@mail.cs.uni-magdeburg.de Fri Dec 12 17:47:31 2003 Subject: Re: [MiNT] Shutdown() discussion From: Petr Stehlik To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi In-Reply-To: References: <1071217877.755.48.camel@joy.sophics> <1071223194.924.97.camel@joy.sophics> <1071236546.931.360.camel@joy.sophics> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1071247433.931.558.camel@joy.sophics> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.4 Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2003 17:43:53 +0100 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p5 (Debian) at sophics.cz 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: joy@sophics.cz Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-ID: X-List-ID: On Fri, 2003-12-12 at 15:01, Frank Naumann wrote: > > > But introducing new syscalls is not overkill? > > > > Syscall is easier to call and better resembles the calling nature of the > > NatFeats, IMHO. > > Uhm, I'm absolutly sure you access a device under /dev with syscalls too True, but with a direct NF syscall you wouldn't have to open a /dev/ file just to shut down the machine :) > > > And new syscalls don't force non-MiNT users to install TSR hacks? > > > As the concrete details are hidden in an abstraction library [if I > understand your previous postings correct] it doesn't matter how exactly > you callout the NatFeats. I thought that without FreeMiNT support we are denounced to call NatFeats directly from libraries and applications and so it was easier to keep the same interface for MiNT and non-MiNT - i.e. the illegal instructions with no cookie jar pointers. Fortunately we explained some things in this three hours long chat and so it seems that there is going to be a different way for MiNT than is for TOS. Petr