Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!mcvax!unido!tub!tmpmbx!netmbx!hase From: hase@netmbx.UUCP (Hartmut Semken) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: To Fix or Not To Fix (Really: applying patches to OS) Message-ID: <1237@netmbx.UUCP> Date: 24 Aug 88 17:06:45 GMT References: <635@ihnet.ATT.COM> <383@snjsn1.SJ.ATE.SLB.COM> <1224@netmbx.UUCP> <524@nikhefh.hep.nl> Reply-To: hase@netmbx.UUCP (Hartmut Semken) Organization: netmbx Public Access Unix, Berlin, West Germany Lines: 42 In article <524@nikhefh.hep.nl> gert@nikhefh.hep.nl (Gert Poletiek) writes: >In article <1224@netmbx.UUCP> hase@netmbx.UUCP (Hartmut Semken) writes: >> >>Or just release the fix on disk: a little residend program replacing the >>original (ROM-) trap handler. >>This would be my way of releasing a fix; if it works and everybody likes >>it, put it in a new ROM set. >>I put 6*27C512 in my 520ST+ to have the "old" and Blitter TOS availeble; >>this is kind of expensive but useful... >>Hartmut Semken, Lupsteiner Weg 67, 1000 Berlin 37 hase@netmbx.UUCP >>If there is something more important than my ego, I want it caught and shot, >>NOW! (Zaphod Beeblebrox) > >I wouldn't like that! Just imagine what happens when one happens to have >5 fixes on GemDos. Yea. Thats the point. Today, I have two sets of ROMs (MEGA and pre-Mega) switchble and one "patch" loaded to RAM (Turbodos; I like it.) The RAM loaded patches can only be an intermediate fix for a ROM based system. But isn't it a great way to release a fix for field-testing? The best fix seems to be a new operating system, right? Let's complain a little more about the heap of shit the st seems to be! Maybe the next company dropping the st is Atari.... No. I'm doing serious work with my st. I do dislike to loose some time writing my own little programs, because the OS behaves a little "strange", but I (*I*) can live with it (almost :-) hase -- Hartmut Semken, Lupsteiner Weg 67, 1000 Berlin 37 hase@netmbx.UUCP If there is something more important than my ego, I want it caught and shot, NOW! (Zaphod Beeblebrox)