Using later libs and drivers with earlier WB releases

[Pat the Cat]

Must admit, scratched my head an awful lot about this. Sounds like it can't work at all, crazy idea...

... actually, it does work, because that's how 3.5 and 3.9 were written. More specifically, that's how the BOOPsi dev tool was used to develop various bits of it.

https://www.codewiz.org/projects/amiga/V44_Changes/V44_Changes_guide/node0012.html

Pulling the same trick might work on earlier releases (2.04 and earlier) MIGHT work in some cases but was never tested by developers.

So, there you go. Ripping out drivers and libaries from the exec base and installing later ones isn't an issue, usually. On 3 and later Amigas.

Whether it works to the extent of using AmigaOS 4 and later 68K devices drivers on earlier Kickstarted Amigas, good question. I would have thought more likely to work than libraries, but could just work fine on everything.

If you look closely at the list, you'll notice the same "problem" files listed as encountered in many "help me" threads - asl.library, icon,library, Picasso95, scsi.device, etc. It's like the developers already knew which ones were going to cause issues later on, for people that hadn't upgraded.

https://www.codewiz.org/projects/amiga/V44_Changes/V44_Changes_guide/node0016.html

[Pat the Cat]

Erm, where do I start?

BOOPSI is a runtime classes API for Intuition, it has nothing whatsoever to do with "loading libs and drivers".

Kind of. BOOPSI actually started as a third party student project. It got imported into CBM and distributed as a Dev tool. Officially at 2.0, but really a lot earlier than that.

And you are both correct, the limit on using the technique is which exec and intuition library is present at system boot. Those are the 2 you can't mess with by straight replacement, so I've been told.

I'm just amazed I didn't know. I thought it was a hack technique. Seems like that is what CBM where aiming for all along. Or rather, the Amiga implementation of the original TripOS libraries and device core system. (TripOS looks spookily the same in spec, and is still being supported as a commercial product).

If you look down the list, you'll see mentions of the common "you must replace with a later version" problem files - scsi.device, filesystems, Picasso96, Cyber, etc etc.

[Pat the Cat]

Chapter 12:

I don't think you understand. BOOPSI had a front end. Not just technical listings or data definitions. At least, I'm pretty sure that's what I saw and reviewed. It wasn't a piece of source code, it was a floppy disk supplied application. It let you  create data sets in a graphical way. Not an "official" CBM dev tool at the time, 3rd party to begin with. A lot of people liked it. Still haven't found what I remember, so I'll keep looking. But you could use it to define any kind of Object oriented data set. It was very flexible, made typing in data and keyboards usage seem very, very crude.

I guess there might be references to Boopsi in the early Fred Fish collection. Perhaps the original source if it really did start as a student project. It it isn't there, it was a commercial application release initially. I honestly can't remember, but I certainly did not have the privalege of reviewing dev tools for operating systems that hadn't been released yet. There would have been no point in doing that. I evaluated stuff for end users only. CBM Dev tools, books, WB2, even 2.1, were kept well away from me, including RKM. I did get HREFM, but I think I had to pay for it initially. More useful in helping me understand.

[Pat the Cat]

LOL, watch out, this guy doesn't like being told he might possibly be wrong about something.

:laughing:

Depends. If I'm called names for having a different opinion, of course I resent it... and so do you, Mike. Everyday abuse might be part of New York, some places of course, it just gets you shot real quick. That isn't a threat, it's a fact.

:roflmao:

[Pat the Cat]

Exec is non-trivial to update, and the coldstart code (which contains the CPU model check) cannot be made RAM-based on some machnes at all. intuition is not hard to replace, just hard to compile since it used to be based on a different compiler than the rest of the system.

I guess "not hard to replace" depends on your skill set. I know I don't have that skill set to recode it, and am unlikely to acquire it anytime soon.