Hyperion announces OS 3.1 update

[trekiej]

Is it possible to create an OS 3.91 and let it be a replacement for OS 3.9? This could replace all the IP that is not licensed to have.

[golem]

I am all for this 3.1.4 initiative. It is getting harder to get <8Gb CFs or DOMs. So to have that all handled natively will be great. To have info and dir report big sizes correctly would be wonderful. Os3.9 looks great with little work but I like my lean and mean 3.1 as well.

[Oldsmobile_Mike]

Yes. And Yes. Our prefs are GadTools based.

Make a complete backup before running the install script.  Got it.  :biglaugh:

[Pgovotsos]

I'm not sure if I saw this explicitly answered. Is it planned that physical Kickstart chips and floppies or just files that we have to burn ourselves? Is there any estimate of when the work will be completed? I know there's basically just the two of you doing all the work and the truest answer is probably "when it's finished" but I was wondering if you had a rough idea in mind.

FWIW I really like the idea of fixing 3.1 vs 3.9. I prefer the clean vs "bulky" and letting me install whatever else I want.

[guest11527]

I'm not sure if I saw this explicitly answered. Is it planned that physical Kickstart chips and floppies or just files that we have to burn ourselves?  

This is a question on the business model. I can really not answer that, I am only doing the software. At this time, it is really not even clear whether there will be ROMs in first place. Testing ROMs and updating ROMs is much harder than just updating software.  

Is there any estimate of when the work will be completed?  

Actually, I was hoping that we would be done already. As far as the number of components is concerned, it is already more than what I had planned initially, which is both good and bad. Good, because there is more progress than planned, bad because there is also more to test. At some point, you must simply say that it is complete enough.

[Munchkin]

I'm to tired to read the entire thread. I just want to ask if this conflicts with OS 3.9? Not that I would live or die with 3.9, I just would prefer not to start all over with a fresh install.

[Oldsmobile_Mike]

I'm to tired to read the entire thread. I just want to ask if this conflicts with OS 3.9? Not that I would live or die with 3.9, I just would prefer not to start all over with a fresh install.

Just read the last page worth of comments, then.  They all refer to 3.9.  :smack:

[kolla]

Now that I have an Amiga system with 4 devices hanging from the IDE port, and rely on IDEFix for them to at all show up - will the OS 3.1.4 scsi.device support 2 IDE channels out of the box, or will IDEFix97 (Or IDEMax??) scsi.device (119.16?) still be needed?