![]() |
![]() |
#2101 |
Coder/webmaster/gamer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canberra/Australia
Posts: 2,711
|
A good emulator should virtualize the guest memory so that it can be mapped to anywhere in the host memory.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2102 | |
son of 68k
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 51
Posts: 5,385
|
Quote:
Sorry, no appendix in the version i've seen. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2103 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
That requires a good host operating system which allows it, and also allows sharing of its own resources by the emulation. You could relocate the 32K with the MMU, however, as ShapeShifter also requires AmigaOs for disk access, this *also* means that the 32K needs to be free of Os resources. Take it as it is: Shapeshifter requires the 32K free, like it or not, and no mind about reasons because nobody is going to change that code anymore. Problem being: It is much easier to release parts of that memory later than to reserve it upfront.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2104 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2105 |
Ex nihilo nihil
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: CH
Posts: 5,142
|
What, just one example?
With all the posts you're making around here, there aren't any more examples? Troll? And the person who claims that it is normal that the OS monopolise part of the chip ram for a very specific case (a really specific use case, it should be remembered - and therefore little used on principle) - that represents what, 0.1% of cases? - to the detriment of the other 99.9% of users, what do you call it? If tomorrow another third-party application asks for 100K reserved, are you going to roll out the red carpet and make the OS block the necessary surplus? Once again, the majority of people here have nothing against *the OS offering help* to a specific use case, but the solution implemented is a bad one because it's to the detriment of the 99.9% of users as it is mandatory by default as soon as you turn on the computer. |
![]() |
![]() |
#2106 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Warsaw/Poland
Age: 56
Posts: 2,115
|
"ShapeShifter is a multitasking freeware Macintosh-II emulator for
the Amiga and DraCo computers. It allows to run Macintosh software concurrently to Amiga applications without hardware add-ons or modifications. Some of the emulation's features: - Supports MacOS 7.1 thru 8.1" Shapeshifter IS NOT Macintosh emulator. Shapeshifter is Macintosh-II emulator, with supported MacOS from 7.1 to 8.1. If Thor want to create new Mac emulator, then this extra memory can be necessary. For now 28KB of chip memory is wasted. This area (from $1000 to $8000) is used for COMPATIBILITY WITH OLDER Macs programs. All other accessed are patched. If something (any access) is missing, Thor can fix Shapeshifter, NOT WASTING Amiga chip RAM. Here are ShapeShifter source code: https://aminet.net/package/misc/emu/ShapeShifter_src |
![]() |
![]() |
#2107 | ||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
Go through the thread, there is another...
Quote:
Quote:
|
||
![]() |
![]() |
#2108 | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
Quote:
Nothing is "wasted". It is reserved, and you can claim it. Quote:
Quote:
The problem with PrepareEmul is that is not at all forward compatible. It assumes that the Kickstart bootstrap code is in a particular location, and that the code that reserves the zero page is in a particular location. This is not going to work in a future version of Kickstart - unless Kick takes care of it for itself. To put it around: You are the one that claims "oh, it's just a minor patch to MacOs, why don't you 'just patch it'". Well, go along, show "how easy this is". I'm not holding my breath for this kind of nonsense for a non-existing problem that does not affect the majority of users. Apparently, so little that it was apparently not being noticed all the years, despite proper documentation. |
|||
![]() |
![]() |
#2109 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: europe
Posts: 1,094
|
Quote:
"$@#$ $@# $@#$ $@#$ #@$ #@$ @#$@##$ @#$ {redacted by FBI and KGB}. I'm out, C= 3.x is good enough for me. You apparently don't want my $$$, so good luck." Yeah, I find it insulting that they would reserve ~32kb chipmem for, subjectively, irrelevant piece of userland software (involving Apple Mac nonetheless) and make you go through extra steps/reboot to nullify it, and expect the majority to suck it up. Just a silent majority guy voicing his immutable opinion. Over and out. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2110 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
Quote:
IOWs, your reaction is all more emotional, without being actualy backed up by facts (after all, you did not even use it, so you do not know whether it made a difference?), whereas the decision towards this feature was driven by a factual analysis of the problem and how to solve it without impacting user experience too much. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2111 | ||||
son of 68k
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 51
Posts: 5,385
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
You are allocating 32k of precious chipmem - which is nearly as scarce as rom space - for just one or two programs. You have to understand that the needs of the many outweight the needs of the few. IOW if two programs don't work, then these two programs have to be changed, not the OS. Unless it is absolutely impossible to make them work (which doesn't appear to have been proven, btw), and even so other software must not be affected. Of course, as you prefer wasting other ppl's chipmem. ![]() Quote:
Another solution could be to add an option in the boot menu for reserving that space. Have you even thought of doing it this way ? |
||||
![]() |
![]() |
#2112 | |||||||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Again, which games do *not* run under 3.1.4 due to this decision? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
No, and again, I do not right away see the need for that. You are reacting emotionally, but not rational. A rational argument would be pinpoint to critical applications that break due to that problem - but there is nothing on the table, actually. Anything that could break could be worked around by "pulling the switch". Whether that is in the boot menu, requiring a reboot after setting a checkmark, or in a program in the startup-sequence does not make a practical difference. To avoid memory fragmentation, you need to go through a reboot anyhow. The program is the better solution since it can be automated. The boot menu you have to check manually. |
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#2113 | |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Warsaw/Poland
Age: 56
Posts: 2,115
|
Quote:
https://eab.abime.net/showpost.php?p...&postcount=223 Especially this "reserve the lower 4K of memory (which is all that the Mac needs - not 32K)." 4K, not 32K. And this is not problem, if accessed memory over 4K occured. THIS IS BUG. Fix Shapeshifter (sources available), NOT MADE STUPID CHANGES in Amiga ROM. Maybe do you want to fix all buggy accesses for 32 KB before 0 address? You know how many accesses to $ffff8000-$ffffffff area occured in buggy Amiga programs? Aaa, sorry, but you dont like idea to add HiMem for Amiga OS. Of course, you compared same Mac program under ShapeShifter and under Fusion? Or maybe this bug occured only for Shapeshifter? Which Mac program(s) call/use area from $1000 to $8000 under ShapeShifter? And because you cant fix Shapeshifter code, you create very special "bypass"? Genial. Last edited by Don_Adan; Today at 15:02. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2114 | ||||||||
son of 68k
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 51
Posts: 5,385
|
Quote:
Quote:
The bug is that some AmigaOs version now eats memory where it shouldn't. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We also don't have the luxury to waste chipmem. Quote:
Nope. If this was, that 32k would be free to start with. Quote:
I don't give a sh** actually, still being using Os3.0. I just read this thread out of curiosity and tried to help. Now, ask yourself the question if you are not a little emotional here. The crux is : do *not* reserve that memory unless explicitly told to do so, either by boot menu option or PrepareEmul-kind of program (thru some MoveMemLo API if you want). What you did is to reserve this 32k all the time. The proper way to handle it is to reserve it only when the user wants it. Just do this, and everything will be fine. Even if this needs a reboot, which it always needed up to now anyway. |
||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#2116 |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
Yup. Do you seriously expect a full blown library for a single binary switch? It does what it is supposed to do, in the shortest and most efficient way.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2117 | |||||||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Germany
Posts: 3,484
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Says you. I don't. I believe it "should", as it was the minimal invasive solutiont that was the most harmful solution. Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
We do, because, in case you really need, you can address the problem. Apparently, not many people had. There was traffic on the AmigaOs customer support, but really nothing much on this. Quote:
Because there wasn't really much you had to show where this does damage anything. |
|||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#2118 |
Coder/webmaster/gamer
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canberra/Australia
Posts: 2,711
|
Most Mac emulators on most platforms make no such requirement of the host system. It is not necessary for emulation in general, only for particular emulators where the hardware is not fully virtualized.
|
![]() |
![]() |
#2119 | |||||||||
son of 68k
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lyon / France
Age: 51
Posts: 5,385
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Of course, i'm not alone saying this - including Jim Drew who actually wrote a Mac emulator. Seen that link in Don Adan's post ? Quote:
Quote:
I know by experience that if something can go wrong, then something will go wrong. This is a programmer's life, nothing emotional. |
|||||||||
![]() |
![]() |
#2120 | |
Ex nihilo nihil
Join Date: Oct 2017
Location: CH
Posts: 5,142
|
Quote:
![]() ![]() You are invited to propose a real Amiga API to fix this MAC OS specific problem. I am sure not only the 0,1% of MAC customers buying the Amiga OS for that use will reward you accordingly, but also the others 99,9% of Amiga users as well. ![]() |
|
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 3 (2 members and 1 guests) | |
peceha, clebin |
Thread Tools | |
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AmigaOS 3.1.x v 3.9 | steve_mynott | New to Emulation or Amiga scene | 35 | 19 April 2020 06:23 |
AmigaOS 3.9 | PoLoMoTo | support.WinUAE | 8 | 27 August 2011 18:06 |
AmigaOS 3.5 or 3.9 | maddoc666 | support.Apps | 12 | 22 February 2010 08:02 |
AmigaOS | koncool | request.Apps | 6 | 04 June 2003 17:45 |
AmigaOS XL | sturme | New to Emulation or Amiga scene | 4 | 15 January 2002 02:13 |
|
|