Re: [ql-users] Re: Q40/Q60 device drivers
On Wed, Jun 27, 2001 at 06:06:17AM +0100, Dave Walker wrote: My DiscOVER can already read CD's if it can get direct sector access (it can also handle DOS format hard disks if the same can be done). Unfortunately it appears that none of the current emulators give this level of access to the native media on which their QXL.WIN file systems reside - a great shame I believe. UQLX will give you direct sector access through normal Unix devices, simple open#4,'/dev/fd0' will do. The positioning is linear bytewise ( though sector boundaries should probably be respected for compatibility). Bye Richard
Re: [ql-users] Re: Q40/Q60 device drivers
On Fri, 29 Jun 2001 00:20:40 +0100 Q Branch [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], Thierry Godefroy [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Jeudi 28 Juin 2001 23:42, Tony Firshman wrote: On Thu, 28 Jun 2001 at 21:16:18, you wrote: C'est l'exception qui confirme la règle (which I will risk to try to translate into: This is the exception which confirms the rule) The exception proves the rule I knew it was risky... ;-) In actual fact the word 'exception' as used in the context of this saying originally meant the opposite of what it does today. Therefore the expression means that an example taken from a a list will confirm the premise and not the meaning held today that an example which contradicts a rule will confirm it. A concept which is plainly stupid. This is a good example of English meaning changing over the years and people being too happy to parrot a meaningless phrase rather than apply any thought. The original translation was closest. I'm sorry to say that the immediately above is spurious and requires comment: Actually, the phrase proves the rule MAY BE TRANSLATED TO THE VERNACULAR AS tests the rule ... The almost archaic use of the word proof is still (no pun intended) used in the labeling of alcoholic spirits. I believe that some fuel ratings are referred to as test ... So, 'the exception _tests_ the rule' is the correct transliteration to the vernacular. Similarly, 'the _proof_ is in the pudding' would be transliterated to 'the _test_ is in the pudding'. Yes, the same word is frequently used as BOTH a verb AND a noun in English whereby the external form is the same AND the internal form is etymologically kindred. Further, Such-and-such proving grounds IS readily understood to be Such-and-such testing grounds ... So, we find the word proof and test maintain their synonymous nature when used as EITHER a verb OR noun OR adjective OR __. A common external form (i.e., 'word') having multiple grammatical utilization is, of course, a consequence of the general lack of declension and/or conjugation (where applicable) in the English language. GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
Re: [ql-users] Re: Q40/Q60 device drivers
At 01:12 PM 6/28/2001 -0400, Nasta wrote: Let me give you an example. Suppose someone implemented SCSI on the Q40. Then, you could connect an IDE and a SCSI hard disc to it. Boh would use the QWA file system, but here is the problem: each device would have it's own copy of the QWA handling code. If there was a CD connected to either (and here we would already be circumventing another driver that works on the same hardware), with a QXL.WIN on it, then the CD driver would also need it's own copy of the QWA handling code. And, there would be no way to make one be win1_ the other win2_ and the QXL.WIN on the CD be a win3_, although they logically should be. It could be done, if they were all set to _USE another name, then some sort of DEV_USE would be used to make them dev1,2,3, and then a DEV_USE win would make them win 1,2,3. Total number of QWA copies: 3. Total number of directory devices used: 4. If you think about it, only one copy of the QWA handler code and only one device driver would really be needed. Now, I'm not an expert in XFS (the IRIX file system), but I spent enough time listening to the experts talking about it so that I know a little about it. With XFS, the file system is separated from the physical device by a virtual file system (vfs). In other words, an XFS inode, points to a vfs inode, which points to a physical device sector. This way XFS can work across hard drives and CD's. This also allows for a volume manager (XLV) to come into play, and step in between XFS and the VFS. XLV allows striping and disk mirroring. With SCSI pretty much being the only way to hook up disks and tapes, the SCSI controller one the one point where every call has to go through and the controller could handle multiple conversations (sort of timeshared as the SCSI protocol only allows one conversation at a time). Something like this could be implemented in SMSQ/E, but it would take a concerted effort. The XFS team had about 5-8 people at any one time. With SMSQ/E we just have TT. Tim Swenson
Re: [ql-users] QPC v2.03
On 30 Jun 2001, at 13:33, Marcel Kilgus wrote: QPC v2.03 together with SMSQ/E v2.99 is now available from the usual places. Ins't this great service? Wolfgang - www.wlenerz.com
Re: [ql-users] QPC v2.03
At 01:33 ìì 30/6/2001 +0200, you wrote: QPC v2.03 together with SMSQ/E v2.99 is now available from the usual places. Issues addressed: - Severe 16bit sprite cache bug in SMSQ/E v2b98 - 0x0 sized windows now possible in 16bit mode - SER_USE and PAR_USE fixed Marcel Since obviously the link is out of date, try to follow this one to get it: http://j-m-s.com/download/eng/qpc2v203.zip Phoebus
Re: [ql-users] Program type Identification
Executables can be tested via the FTYP function (type 1 is executable) of Toolkit 2. AFAIK you can't recognise Resident Extensions by file type, as they are type 0 data files like text files, sbasic programs etc, although some manage to mask themselves as 'executable type' - some versions of Turbo Toolkit used to do this. In theory you could probably test for extensions either by (1) filename extension (they are usually _cde, _bin, _rxt or _rext files) or by looking for a typical piece of code at the start, something like lea definition blockrts or looking for the procedure definition block, but it wouldn't be an easy task or very reliable - youd probably be better off going by filename extensions. -- Dilwyn Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.soft.net.uk/dj/index.html Phoebus Dokus wrote: Hmmm, since my knowledge on the matter is practically non-existent IS there a way (by reading for example x bytes of a file) to find from sbasic if a file is a Resident Extension, and Executable etc?
[ql-users] QPC 2.03
Having downloaded and installed this version, I have found that it is like working through treacle (mouse operations are very slow and overshooting happens) and the character definition is not good. What have I done wrong please? Regards, Peter Fox
Re: [ql-users] PAR_USE
Dilwyn Jones wrote: I was writing a pointer driven 'System Set' utility which offers you facilities to set PAR_USE, FLP_USE, SER_USE, PAR_USE etc. All the commands seem to work if just entered from SBASIC as commands, which is why I was having difficulty testing the program - it would work sometimes and not others. It used a bad memory pointer, therefore it was pure chance whether it was going to accept your parameter or not. Actually setting the new name never worked. For QPC the latest release is fine again, the other platforms just have to wait for Tony. Marcel
Re: [ql-users] Program type Identification
On 7/1/01 at 7:15 PM Dilwyn Jones wrote: Executables can be tested via the FTYP function (type 1 is executable) of Toolkit 2. Yes, they could also be identified (and some more interesting info gleaned) from the first couple of bytes, the executable header. Don't remember the definition of the top of my head, but I know hex 4AFB appears in it :-) Resident extensions cannot be recognized as they are just pieces of code, they are called after they are loaded (LRESPR), but don't have any defined headers etc. There is also file type 2 (or was it -1?) for linker files. Pity the file type isn't used more often. Nastac
Re: [ql-users] Program type Identification
Executables can be tested via the FTYP function (type 1 is executable) of Toolkit 2. Yes, they could also be identified (and some more interesting info gleaned) from the first couple of bytes, the executable header. Don't remember the definition of the top of my head, but I know hex 4AFB appears in it :-) It's only a 'suggestion' (that most [commercial] programs obey), code will still execute if it doesn't have this format - it's just that extensions (like 'JOBS') will not be able to display any 'job name'. When a program is EXEC'd it starts executing with the first byte of the file. The suggestion was that the program should start: 00: xx xx xx xx xx xx xx 4A FB 08: LL LL nn nn nn nn nn nn nn 10: nn where xx = executable code (usually it's just a BRA[.S] instruction = $60 ..), = the length of the program name (.W, usually 00LL), nn = the bytes of the name, eg: 00: 60 00 04 E0 00 00 4A FB £.J. 08: 00 06 45 64 69 74 6F 72 ..Editor 10: 6D 64 76 32 5F 00 00 7E mdv2_..~ etc is the start of my file editor. On 'JOBS', this appears as: Job tag owner priority 0 0 0 32 4 5 0s40 Editor Resident extensions cannot be recognized as they are just pieces of code, they are called after they are loaded (LRESPR), but don't have any defined headers etc. Although there is no defined header, they usually start with code that links the next names in and then exits, and looks something like: 00: 43 FA 00 0CLEAtable,A1 04: 34 78 01 10MOVE.W $0110,A2 08: 4E 92 JSR(A2) 0A: 70 00 MOVEQ #$00,D0 0C: 4E 75 RTS 10: 00 nntable DC.W 4; Number of PROCs 12: oo oo DC.W proc1-* ; offset to 1st proc code 14: 00 LL DC.W 5; length of name 16: 70 72 6F 63 49 DC.B 'proc1' ; name of 1st proc 1B: 00 ALIGN ; Words must be on even boundaries 1C: . rest of proc defn's Tho' the LEA and MOVE.W may be the other way round, in which case the file will start: 00: 34 78 01 10MOVE.W $0110,A2 04: 43 FA 00 08LEAtable,A1 But when you get to pure executable code as opposed to a job (eg the Breakout game that came with the QL), there's no defined standard or suggestion, so good luck. Robert
Re: [ql-users] Program type Identification
At 10:59 ìì 1/7/2001 +0100, you wrote: Executables can be tested via the FTYP function (type 1 is executable) of Toolkit 2. Yes, they could also be identified (and some more interesting info gleaned) from the first couple of bytes, the executable header. Don't remember the definition of the top of my head, but I know hex 4AFB appears in it :-) It's only a 'suggestion' (that most [commercial] programs obey), code will still execute if it doesn't have this format - it's just that extensions (like 'JOBS') will not be able to display any 'job name'. When a program is EXEC'd it starts executing with the first byte of the file. The suggestion was that the program should start: 00: xx xx xx xx xx xx xx 4A FB 08: LL LL nn nn nn nn nn nn nn 10: nn where xx = executable code (usually it's just a BRA[.S] instruction = $60 ..), = the length of the program name (.W, usually 00LL), nn = the bytes of the name, eg: 00: 60 00 04 E0 00 00 4A FB £.J. 08: 00 06 45 64 69 74 6F 72 ..Editor 10: 6D 64 76 32 5F 00 00 7E mdv2_..~ etc is the start of my file editor. On 'JOBS', this appears as: Job tag owner priority 0 0 0 32 4 5 0s40 Editor Resident extensions cannot be recognized as they are just pieces of code, they are called after they are loaded (LRESPR), but don't have any defined headers etc. Although there is no defined header, they usually start with code that links the next names in and then exits, and looks something like: 00: 43 FA 00 0CLEAtable,A1 04: 34 78 01 10MOVE.W $0110,A2 08: 4E 92 JSR(A2) 0A: 70 00 MOVEQ #$00,D0 0C: 4E 75 RTS 10: 00 nntable DC.W 4; Number of PROCs 12: oo oo DC.W proc1-* ; offset to 1st proc code 14: 00 LL DC.W 5; length of name 16: 70 72 6F 63 49 DC.B 'proc1' ; name of 1st proc 1B: 00 ALIGN ; Words must be on even boundaries 1C: . rest of proc defn's Tho' the LEA and MOVE.W may be the other way round, in which case the file will start: 00: 34 78 01 10MOVE.W $0110,A2 04: 43 FA 00 08LEAtable,A1 But when you get to pure executable code as opposed to a job (eg the Breakout game that came with the QL), there's no defined standard or suggestion, so good luck. Robert A-ha! this gets better and better :-) At least now I have an idea :-) Thx all for the info :-) Phoebus
Re: [ql-users] Re: Q40/Q60 device drivers
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes SNIP The exception proves the rule I'm sorry to say that the immediately above is spurious and requires comment: SNIP An interesting new take on the subject. I got my information from my English lecturer at college who extensively studied English usage and the changes which have occurred over the centuries. Of course the usage of the word to prove have been changed over the years too and, in baking parlance, you use the word to describe the fermenting process so that harks back to the 'pudding'. This is, however, not a real subject for discussion on this list and should be continued in private if you want. -- Roy Wood Q Branch 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex BN41 2LB Tel : +44(0)1273-386030 / Mobile : +44 (0) 7836-745501 Fax +44 (0)1273-381577 web site : http://www.qbranch.demon.co.uk/
Re: [ql-users] Re: Q40/Q60 device drivers
On Sat, 30 Jun 2001 21:19:53 -0500 Phoebus Dokos [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: At 12:20 ðì 2/7/2001 +0100, you wrote: In article [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes SNIP The exception proves the rule I'm sorry to say that the immediately above is spurious and requires comment: SNIP An interesting new take on the subject. I got my information from my English lecturer at college who extensively studied English usage and the changes which have occurred over the centuries. Of course the usage of the word to prove have been changed over the years too and, in baking parlance, you use the word to describe the fermenting process so that harks back to the 'pudding'. This is, however, not a real subject for discussion on this list and should be continued in private if you want. -- Roy Wood Q Branch 20 Locks Hill, Portslade, Sussex BN41 2LB Tel : +44(0)1273-386030 / Mobile : +44 (0) 7836-745501 Fax +44 (0)1273-381577 web site : http://www.qbranch.demon.co.uk/ I can't help it but butt in the actual phrase is a translation of an ancient Greek phrase which actually means, the EXCEPTION REAFFIRMS (NOT TESTS) THE RULE :-) Test as in testament!?! So, the translation from the original Greek phrase would appear to remain authentic despite thoughts to the contrary. Of course, this reminds me of a couple of proverbs which I first heard in Russian and which, many years later, I subsequently heard in English -- from wither and whence is the real origin? GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO! Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less! Join Juno today! For your FREE software, visit: http://dl.www.juno.com/get/tagj.
