Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!rutgers!cbmvax!ewout
From: ewout@topcat.cbm.commodore.com (Ewout Walraven - CATS)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.hardware
Subject: Re: New Kickstart Release for the Amiga 3000 available
Message-ID: <15444@cbmvax.commodore.com>
Date: 29 Oct 90 13:51:56 GMT
References: <82.2728F58D@myamiga.UUCP> <29301@pasteur.Berkeley.EDU>
Sender: news@cbmvax.commodore.com
Organization: Commodore, West Chester, PA
Lines: 29

navas@cory.Berkeley.EDU (David C. Navas) writes:

>In article <82.2728F58D@myamiga.UUCP> smp@myamiga.UUCP (Steve Palm) writes:
>>
>>
>> BN> 
>> BN>                 (Setpatch 36.4)
>> Hey, no offense, but why do you still need a SetPatch utility?  I thought it 
>>was only there to fix bugs in the ROMS.

>What's really a scary thought is what functions they patch...
><apologies if any secrets are revealed, this was the version Cmdre sent me that
> they said was public...>

> My SetPatch reveals that they patch: Lock() Open().

> I think I'm going to buy that tape drive backup RSN!   :)

Those patches are to keep programs which relied on side-effects of 1.3
happy and have nothing to do with the behaviour of the functions themselves,
which is fine.

Having setpatch standard in the startup-sequence makes it easier (for
the user and Commodore) to implement little patches like these.


>David Navas                                   navas@cory.berkeley.edu
>"Excuse my ignorance, but I've been run over by my train of thought."  -me
>								(and Calvin)