From mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Mon May 31 17:59:23 2010 Message-ID: <4C0430D5.3020002@online.no> Date: Mon, 31 May 2010 23:57:41 +0200 From: Jo Even Skarstein User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.9) Gecko/20100423 Thunderbird/3.0.4 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: mint@lists.fishpool.fi Subject: Re: [MiNT] Multi-Target SpareMiNT (RPM) Thoughts - How to do it maybe References: <4BFEDC2C.8050008@online.no> <4BFFCBCB.6070705@atari-source.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-ecartis-version: Ecartis v1.0.0 Sender: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi Errors-to: mint-bounce@lists.fishpool.fi X-original-sender: joska@online.no 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 o4VLxMeT020308 On 05/29/2010 10:47 AM, Paul Wratt wrote: > agreed > > gcc can be used to create .TOS (or others) that will run on standard > ST. Why would you want to make this not possible? That is not the issue. But would you run gcc on a 4Mb ST? And is it possible to run rpm itself on a 4Mb ST running MiNT? > it is nto acceptable to drop certain architecture simply because it is > no longer in "practical use". If that were the case, none of us would > be using Atari's, clones or MiNT, and ACP/FireBee would not have come > into existence. That is a valid point. But it doesn't mean that you canẗ create software that doesn't work on a 68000. Jo Even