From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Wed Apr 29 09:43:37 2009 Subject: Re: [MiNT] MiNTLib for ColdFire From: Petr Stehlik To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi In-Reply-To: References: <49F743B1.8030803@freesbee.fr> <1240957935.9590.38.camel@joy> <49F78A7A.9020001@freesbee.fr> <1240985088.4402.13.camel@petr> <49F803C5.9050303@freesbee.fr> <1240993687.4402.60.camel@petr> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-2" Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2009 15:38:41 +0200 Message-Id: <1241012321.4402.110.camel@petr> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.26.1 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: pstehlik@sophics.cz Precedence: bulk List-help: List-unsubscribe: List-Id: X-List-ID: List-subscribe: List-owner: List-post: Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by mail.sparemint.org id n3TDhaGN031819 Jo Even Skarstein píše v St 29. 04. 2009 v 15:22 +0200: > I really don't see the point in adapting source code or recompile for a new > CPU when the virtual CPU is so powerful. The only thing you achieve when > doing this is to complicate things, as you still need to support 68k > binaries. OK. So you basically say that adapting MiNTlib for ColdFire (see the subject of this thread) is unnecessary (or even a bad idea). Then I am wondering why you mention ColdFire adapted AHCC in another message of this thread. Petr