From fnaumann@mail.cs.uni-magdeburg.de Tue Jun 29 17:38:58 2004 Message-ID: <40E18B06.8070503@seznam.cz> Date: Tue, 29 Jun 2004 17:30:14 +0200 From: Standa Opichal User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.6) Gecko/20040116 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mint@fishpool.com Subject: Re: [MiNT] mint & mmu References: <20040629082901.GA17656@hysteria.sk> <003f01c45ddb$dad79900$770963d9@blaszak> <40E183D0.4000909@seznam.cz> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new-20030616-p7 (Debian) at fishpool.fi 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: X-Milter: ClamAV 0.70/0.70kjel X-Milter: milter-regex 1.5jel X-Milter: ClamAV 0.70/0.70kjel X-Milter: milter-regex 1.5jel Hi! I was talking about the Setexc(-1) that can be trapped by the kernel and a proper value can be returned (it's already beeing done for the cookie jar if you enable the PRIVATE_JAR). STan Frank Naumann wrote: > Hello! > >> You can emulate them like it is done if you enable the private cookie >> jar experimental feature. > > > I don't understand > >>>> ... pointer and this is also not necessary, because the cookie jar >>>> pointer, >>>> and most low mem variables can be read via BIOS's function Setexc(), >>>> and >>>> without switching to Super(). >>> >>> >>> Setexc() takes a function pointer that is called out in supervisor >>> mode. I see no difference against a function that do Super() at the >>> beginning and the end. > > > > Ciao > ...Frank > > -- > ATARI FALCON 040 // MILAN 060 > ----------------------------------------- > http://www.cs.uni-magdeburg.de/~fnaumann/ > e-Mail: fnaumann@freemint.de > >