From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi  Fri Dec 12 21:24:14 2008
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
  s=dk20050327; d=earthlink.net;
  b=KwMGrrKiu6Am6NKBPYJU6aysxV0aIhpq6AbmdakeKiXxD9h+5+b3prcfrAwM4Bu8;
  h=Received:Message-ID:Date:From:Reply-To:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:X-ELNK-Trace:X-Originating-IP;
Message-ID: <49431BE4.90401@earthlink.net>
Date: Fri, 12 Dec 2008 20:20:20 -0600
From: josephus <dogbird@earthlink.net>
Reply-To: dogbird@earthlink.net
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows; U; Windows NT 5.1; en-US; rv:1.8.1.18) Gecko/20081031 SeaMonkey/1.1.13
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: p.slegg@scubadivers.co.uk
CC: mint@lists.fishpool.fi
Subject: Re: [MiNT] the kernel
References: <1175807537.739034.175070@o5g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>	<493EFB19.8050907@chello.nl> <20081210110122.fz8wx1iaas8c4k4w@pop.freeola.net>
In-Reply-To: <20081210110122.fz8wx1iaas8c4k4w@pop.freeola.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-ELNK-Trace: 435374b7a01b22fcd780f4a490ca6956abb457f1b4332f521e35e269f42b44c164c81b58bd94e2cf350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c350badd9bab72f9c
X-Originating-IP: 70.249.80.181
X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0
Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi
X-original-sender: dogbird@earthlink.net
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>
List-subscribe: <mailto:mint-request@lists.fishpool.fi?Subject=subscribe>
List-owner: <mailto:tjhukkan@fishpool.fi>
List-post: <mailto:mint@lists.fishpool.fi>

p.slegg@scubadivers.co.uk wrote:
> I had another crazy thought about enhancing the kernel.
>
> From what I've read of the history of Mint, it was based on a BSD
> like kernel and extended to allow GEM apps to run.
>
> So intead of trying to add loads of modern OS features to FreeMint,
> why not take a newer BSD and port the FreeMint back features into it ?
>
> This has the advantage that the developers will be dealing with the
> Atari/GEM features of FreeMint that they are familiar with rather
> than trying to grapple with adding unfamiliar stuff into FreeMint.
> However they would stll have to learn their way around unfamiliar BSD
> code.
>
> Peter
>
>
>
>
>

A vm  NEEDS  a pit.  a programmable timer.   and context switching.  in 
the  OS.   then paging  4K blocks out of memory in a LRU (Last Resently 
Used)  method.   then you will have the basic structure of a VM.    TOS 
and even Mint dont have the hardware support.   the closest thing a TOS 
will have is the vertical interrupt.  in my machines it was 200ms  and 
with a fast disk could have run a slow VM.  I am all for  a VM that 
works  in MiNT.

josephus


-- 
I go sailing in the summer 
and look at stars in the winter,
"Everybody is ignorant but on different subjects" 
   --Will Rogers
Its not what you know that gets you in trouble
its what you know that aint so.
   --josh billings.