From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Sun Oct 31 14:53:29 2004 X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de To: From: Peter Slegg Subject: Re: [MiNT] Shareable/loadable libraries: a preliminary document X-Mailer: MyMAIL Rev:1.72-05.10410 (Atari/(STiK/STinG/GlueSTiK)) X-Hardware: Atari Milan MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 31 Oct 2004 14:47:48 +0200 (GMT) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Priority: 3 X-MSMail-Priority: Normal Message-Id: <0005a000.019fa5acd014@smtp.freeola.net> References: <4184138D.7090304@highlandsun.com> In-Reply-To: 4184138D.7090304@highlandsun.com X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-To: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: peterslegg@scubadivers.co.uk Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new at relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on relay.boerde.de X-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.7 tagged_above=-50.5 required=3.8 tests=AWL, BAYES_00, MISSING_MIMEOLE, MISSING_OUTLOOK_NAME X-Spam-Level: * On Sat, 30 Oct 2004 15:19:57 -0700, Howard Chu wrote: > we always had to bend over backward and > support 68000 in addition to everything else so we couldn't rely on the > presence of an MMU or virtual memory. I don't really understand everything being discussed here and I am going to be controversial and ask the old question. Should 68000 support be considered for such an advanced step in FreeMint development ? I know lots of people still use 68000 Ataris and I have nothing against that but there is a lot of OS choice for these machines (current Mint version, Magic, Geneva). Why restrict future Freemint development ? Is it not enough to support 030, 040 and 060 cpu's in the future releases ? I am not trying to upset 68000 users but I think the Mint developers job is probably hard enough supporting a platform as diverse as the Atari. Sorry if I have ruffled a few feathers. Regards, Peter