From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi  Fri Jun 10 20:14:13 2005
X-Original-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Delivered-To: fnaumann@mail.boerde.de
Message-ID: <20050610181058.16372.qmail@mailcz.in.systinet.com>
References: <42A85C4F.7050500@atari-hcm.de>
            <1118332250.6432.5.camel@linuxbox>
            <1118418583.7315.1.camel@joy.home>
In-Reply-To: <1118418583.7315.1.camel@joy.home>
From: Standa Opichal <opichals@seznam.cz>
To: mint@fishpool.com
Subject: Re: [MiNT] Problem with mint 1.16 installation
Date: Fri, 10 Jun 2005 20:10:58 +0200
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="iso-8859-1"
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: <mailto:ecartis@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=help>
List-unsubscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=unsubscribe>
List-Id: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
X-List-ID: <mint.lists.fishpool.fi>
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=-0.4 tagged_above=-50.5 required=7.0 tests=AWL,
 BAYES_00
X-Spam-Level: 
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by wh58-508.st.uni-magdeburg.de id j5AIEDNr017608

Hi! 

Exactly, if there is a crappy VDI that is not compatible with a particular 
CPU then the VDI is to be patched and not the AES, right? So the hack should 
not go into AES implementation IMHO. 

STanda 


Petr Stehlik writes: 

> Odd Skancke píše v Čt 09. 06. 2005 v 17:50 +0200:
>> with black screen. I had this problem with the ET6K I had in my Hades.
>> However, the latest XaAES (as found in the CVS) turns the caches off
>> before calling v_opnwk()/v_clswk(), and this should cure it.
> 
> I am surprised that an AES must play with CPU caches. Shouldn't XBIOS
> (or VDI, at worst) do that instead? 
> 
> Petr