Amiga.org
Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga News and Community Announcements => Amiga Software News => Topic started by: shIva on May 10, 2003, 05:05:41 PM
-
there´s a new version (v2.9005.483) of the dnetc client (ogr/rc5-72) availible from distributed.net (http://www.distributed.net). you can download the new version here (http://www.distributed.net/download/clients.php).
At the moment, the amiga rc5 team effort (http://distributed.amiga.org/) is rank #14 in the top 100 over all teams join them :-D
-
woow !
this was the fastest reaction i´ve ever seen :-D
just 2 minutes after sending this news-item was published.
-
These clients are few months old IIRC.
-
These clients are few months old IIRC.
One month old, actually - the clients were in pre-release status since then, and were moved to official release a day or so ago. Of course, everyone should make sure they use this latest client, since it's RC5-72 cores are the fastest yet.
BTW, I hope those with A1-XEs are running the latest client for Linux - the Altivec RC5-72 core rocks! :-)
-
Hi,
Well, mine is already running on my AmigaOne: :-D
url : http://users.pandora.be/amigaone
De groetjes, Dirk.
-
dnetc on PEGASOS G3-600 running MorphOS (http://www.iki.fi/sintonen/pics/dnetc.png)
Oh yes, dnetc OS detection is broken. :-)
-
dnetc on PEGASOS G3-600 running MorphOS
Oh yes, dnetc OS detection is broken.
Sometimes I really don't understand the fascination with software running under emulation on MorphOS having to act differently just because it is running on MorphOS??? The client was built soley for PowerUp, and therefore runs under the PowerUp emulation of MorphOS. The OS is reported correctly.
Besides, a single client build is tied to one OS -it would be impossible for the same client binary to handle multiple OSs. Simply because the OS is hardcoded into the client and the ids for that OS are used in the buffer files and internally by the client.
IMHO, it would only be right for a client built for MorphOS (native) to report itself as MorphOS. And at this time, this doesn't exist.
-
Sometimes I really don't understand the fascination with software running under emulation on MorphOS having to act differently just because it is running on MorphOS???
Something I really don't understand the people's urge to put words into other's mouth.
The OS is reported correctly.
Wrong. The OS is reported wrong.
The version mapping inside dnetc is following:
36 2.0
37 2.0x
38 2.1
39 3.0
40 3.1
41 3.2 *
42 3.3 *
43 3.4 *
44 3.5
45 3.9
46 4.0 **
*) These don't exist at all.
**) There is no v46.
Anything above 46 is reported as 3.5. That *is* broken.
-
Well you se the program is made for AmigaOS it even says so in the shell.
'distrbuted.net client _for_ Amiga OS ...'
Just becorse MorphOS can emulate Amiga programes dosent mean it has to say its runing under MOS.
About the version numbering I agree that it's wroung to say its OS3.5 if the version number is above 46, The correct thing must say somthing like 'unkonwn version' or 'OS ?.?'
René W. Olsen
-
Well you se the program is made for AmigaOS it even says so in the shell.
'distrbuted.net client _for_ Amiga OS ...'
Just becorse MorphOS can emulate Amiga programes dosent mean it has to say its runing under MOS.
Again, stop putting words in my mouth please! Where exactly did I say it should say MorphOS?
All I meant to say is that the OS version display is broken.
About the version numbering I agree that it's wroung to say its OS3.5 if the version number is above 46, The correct thing must say somthing like 'unkonwn version' or 'OS ?.?'
It would report OS4 as unknown version then. OS4 is v50.
-
@Piru
Out of curiosity, which version of MOS are you running?
-
@Madgun68
Development version.
-
Again, stop putting words in my mouth please! Where exactly did I say it should say MorphOS?
Sorry. I misunderstod that you meant with
Wrong. The OS is reported wrong.
I did thing you were talking about the OS name here.
If you only were talking about the os number, then I can only agree.
René W. Olsen