home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: sparky!uunet!pipex!doc.ic.ac.uk!djb
- From: djb@doc.ic.ac.uk (D J Burke)
- Newsgroups: bit.listserv.i-amiga
- Subject: Re: Re: WB 3.0 with 2.04 rom
- Date: 25 Jan 1993 13:52:53 -0000
- Organization: Department of Computing, Imperial College, University of London, UK.
- Lines: 37
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <1k0rblINNr3c@oak25.doc.ic.ac.uk>
- References: <I-AMIGA%93012508000658@RUTVM1.RUTGERS.EDU>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: oak25.doc.ic.ac.uk
-
-
- In article <I-AMIGA%93012508000658@RUTVM1.RUTGERS.EDU>, AVERHE@BANRUC60.BITNET writes:
- |> >
- |> > jorrit@UZ.KULEUVEN.AC.BE writes:
- |> > >Granted, for most of these enhancements you also need the 3.0 ROM but this
- |> > >is not the case for some of them (like MultiView, datatypes, monitor files,
- |> > >...)
- |> >
- |> > Multiview and datatypes use some new features in v39 BOOPSI, so they
- |> > do require a 3.0 ROM. Booting 3.0 with a 2.04 ROM gives you nothing
- |> > new--just a stripped down (because v39 preferences don't work with a
- |> > v37 ROM), somewhat unstable (because of the version mismatches) 2.1.
- |> > All the new stuff in 3.0 is either in ROM, or depends on new stuff in
- |> > ROM.
- |> >
- |>
- |> I've got somewhere the 3.0 on a disk, which you put in the memory with
- |> 'rekick', something simular to zkick. The only difference is that it isn't
- |> reset-proof, when you reset you get back the 1.2/1.3/2.0, or whatever your
- |> roms are, and you have to reload the 3.0.
- |> I've tested it some time ago, and it worked fine.
- |>
- |> I now have exams, but when someone wants to have it, I'll mail it in 2 weeks
- |> or so, just let me know.
- |>
-
- Correct me if I'm wrong (I usually am *B) but isn't the 3.0 ROM image copyrighted
- by our friend Commodore, so sending a copy to someone would be illegal ?
-
- As unsure of the real world as ever
-
- Dug Burke
-
- --
-
- "To err is Human, to really screw it up you have to be a politician"
-
-