Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!oodis01!uplherc!esunix!blgardne From: blgardne@esunix.UUCP (Blaine Gardner) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Re: Save your money re: FALCON Message-ID: <1195@esunix.UUCP> Date: 19 Jan 89 01:15:22 GMT References: <1696@ektools.UUCP> Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation Lines: 32 From article <1696@ektools.UUCP>, by barrett@ektools.UUCP (Chris Barrett): > In article <1170@esunix.UUCP> blgardne@esunix.UUCP (Blaine Gardner) writes: >> >>While we're flaming, you can add the fact that it will not run on a 68010 >>processor either. So it's not anyting as exotic as self modifying code, >>but an illegal instruction. GOMF 3.0 wouldn't trap the error, I didn't >>try DeciGel. >> > > According to the GOMF 3.0 docs, the use of decigel is not necessary, apparently > it is supposed to trap the illegal intruction interrupt such as the move > instructions. Yes, GOMF will trap the exception errors if you tell it to, but neither GOMF or DeciGel (I did get the chance to try it) will help with Falcon. Whatever it's doing wrong is too much for either of the patches to fix it. GOMF does work with most programs that cause the exception error, so I was surprised to find that Falcon still broke. Since the "two weeks" are now up, has the 68020 version of Falcon been released? :-) We need the A2500 and the A2620 to be released so that vendors can't use "non-standard hardware configuration" as an excuse for not supporting alternate CPUs. -- Blaine Gardner @ Evans & Sutherland 580 Arapeen Drive, SLC, Utah 84108 Here: utah-cs!esunix!blgardne {ucbvax,allegra,decvax}!decwrl!esunix!blgardne There: uunet!iconsys!caeco!pedro!worsel!blaine "Nobody will ever need more than 64K." "Nobody needs multitasking on a PC."