🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5435.2760c937@zeus.unomaha.edu>, bacon@zeus.unomaha.edu writes:

> RE: What's Wrong with ARP.

   I'll sum up one more time. 

> Hasn't the point about ARP been made moot since WB 2.0 (soon to be 2.1)
> has been incorporated into it??

   Practically. Since I got 2.0 I have not had _any_ interest in the ARP
commands. The C: commands are small, really tiny, and many are internal to
the Shell. There are of course differences, but with 2.0 the major reasons
ARP was done (BCPL, primarily!) are gone :-)
  
> For those of us who may be less than enlightened, like you, would you 
> mind telling us what some of the pitfalls of using ARP are? 

   Mostly scripts breaking and other incompatibilities around the Shell.
These might not be apparent until someday you Execute an update script or
similar. 

> Also, those of us who have A1000's or A500's will have to stick to something
> like the ARP set unless we shell out the bucks for chip upgrades and the 
> boards to go with them since WB2.X requires the Agnus 1meg chip.

   I've successfully tested 2.0 on an A2000A with the old (thin) Agnus. No
problem, the 1meg Agnus story is just another stoopid rumour. The 2.0 ROM's
will fit any Amiga with a ROM socket, though a single trace may be needed.

> Please don't flame me for any ignorance.  All of us are at different levels
> of experience and this is a public forum.

   OK, I won't. :-) 


                                                  -Henrik

______________________________________________________________________________
| Henrik Clausen, Graffiti Data | If the Doors of Perception where cleansed, |
| ...{pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!  | Man would see Reality as it is - Infinite. |
\______cbmehq!adspdk!hclausen___|_________________________________W. Blake___/

In article <5435.2760c937@zeus.unomaha.edu> bacon@zeus.unomaha.edu writes:
>
>Also, those of us who have A1000's or A500's will have to stick to something
>like the ARP set unless we shell out the bucks for chip upgrades and the 
>boards to go with them since WB2.X requires the Agnus 1meg chip.
                                    ^^^^^^^^
NO, SIR :-)  No chip upgrade necessary. (Ok, preferred, but not necessary.)

>Please don't flame me for any ignorance.

Then please don't post wrong facts.

-- 
Best regards, Dr. Peter Kittel  // E-Mail to  \\  Only my personal opinions... 
Commodore Frankfurt, Germany  \X/ {uunet|pyramid|rutgers}!cbmvax!cbmger!peterk

>In article <5435.2760c937@zeus.unomaha.edu> bacon@zeus.unomaha.edu writes:

>Also, those of us who have A1000's or A500's will have to stick to something
>like the ARP set unless we shell out the bucks for chip upgrades and the
>boards to go with them since WB2.X requires the Agnus 1meg chip.

I was under the impression that 2.0 would NOT require the ECS.	Since
anyone you ask is likely to have a different opinion, could someone from
Commodore please tell us whether this is true?

--
paper :  James Shaffer Jr., 37 Brook Street, Montgomery, PA  17752
uucp  :  uunet!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms  (or)  rutgers!cbmvax!amix!vanth!jms
domain:  jms%vanth@amix.commodore.com	    CompuServe: 72750,2335
quote :  ATTENTION ALL PLANETS OF THE SOLAR FEDERATION: WE HAVE ASSUMED CONTROL

In <5435.2760c937@zeus.unomaha.edu> bacon@zeus.unomaha.edu writes:

Hi all, 

>Hasn't the point about ARP been made moot since WB 2.0 (soon to be 2.1)
>has been incorporated in toto into it??
> 

Well like you said thats what we HOPE, I for one havent actually heard much
of the DOS side of 2.0.  Maybe someone can let us in on the secrets?

>For those of us who may be less than enlightened, like you, would you 
>mind telling us what some of the pitfalls of using ARP are?  Especially
>since you are carrying this conversation publicly on NEWS.

ARP does actually have some nasty bugs hiding in there. The only one I have
specifically traced is one with the newcli/newshell function.  I dont really
know what the problem is but the symptoms include stack overflows and memory
related gurus.

Well anyhow hopefully 2.0 will have upgraded dos commands and we will not
need arp.

bernard.

In article <jms.1998@vanth.UUCP> jms@vanth.UUCP (Jim Shaffer) writes:
>I was under the impression that 2.0 would NOT require the ECS.	Since
>anyone you ask is likely to have a different opinion, could someone from
>Commodore please tell us whether this is true?

	2.0 (the rom) does not require ECS.  Of course, without ECS chips
you don't get any of the ECS features.  I have no knowlege of how 2.0 will
be distributed/installed by the various sales companies for machines other
than the A3000.  I would suspect a bundle with ECS chips, and ROM available
separately, but I don't know for sure and don't quote me on it, it's just a
guess.

-- 
Randell Jesup, Keeper of AmigaDos, Commodore Engineering.
{uunet|rutgers}!cbmvax!jesup, jesup@cbmvax.commodore.com  BIX: rjesup  
The compiler runs
Like a swift-flowing river
I wait in silence.  (From "The Zen of Programming")  ;-)