home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- From: ekl@sdf.lonestar.org (Evan K. Langlois)
- Subject: MiNT goes Unix
- Date: Mon, 17 Jan 94 15:20:39 CST
-
-
- I think we are preceding from the wrong end. Instead of working on the
- file system structure and the compiler flags for using TOSFS file systems
- I think we need to look at the binaries themselves.
-
- We aren't going to know what paths to put the binaries into until we
- know what binaries exist. Then we can decide where to put them. I'd say
- that the TOS Filesystem is not a problem. Anyone running a Unix-like set-up
- is either going to run MINIXFS or somehting similar or is going to get
- some sort of fix for the TOSFS, someone mentioned a GEMDOS FS that called
- Unix2Dos. If you want the library to support specific TOS FS naming
- then use Dpathconf to find out the limits of the filesystem at run-time and
- then decide if the filename needs mangling.
-
- My enviroment is gone crazy. We need a better way of configuring. Perhaps
- a configuration directory? So that an ENV var points to a directory where
- config files are kept. A program would then load in its config file from
- the directory instead of having a cluttered enviroment. For speed reasons,
- a Binary configuration utility would be best - to modify the executables
- to change paths and defaults (perhaps a TOSFS switch if Dpathconf is too
- difficult or inefficient to determine file name mangling conventions).
-
- I'm in support of rewriting GEM. GEM is using up 90% of my CPU time and
- that is when my mouse doesn't move and the keyboard doesn't move. I wrote
- my own little mouse tracking facility that used Fselect with /dev/mouse
- and /dev/console to track the mouse and work out double-click events and
- such. Not only did it work, and used NO CPU time when I didn't move the
- mouse or type, but I couldn't make it use more than about 5% and I tried
- real hard! If ATARI isn't willing to rewrite GEM, perhaps we should?
- How hard could it be to rewrite the AES - perhaps structure it like
- NeXT Step (or add more direct X emulation although I think X is too inefficient
- for use on an ATARI). You can add wrapper functions to emulate the older
- AES calls or something. It would be a difficult undertaking, but the
- machine is going to be hindered badly unless you remove the OS polling.
-
- I think we should also work on getting a non-blocking fork() and non-blocking
- IO too. If PowerDos can do it, then it can be done. DMA disk IO doesn't
- have to lock up the whole machine does it?
-
- To start, lets get a list of binaries that are available for MiNT. We
- can then decide where these binaries should go in a Unix hierarchy,
- deciding between whatever current ... standard? .. best fits what we've
- got and then we can also decide what sorts of binary configuration can be
- added to those programs.
-
- Its a place to start. I'm always in favor of a place to start over
- theory.
-
-
-