Configuration - Boot/Run at Startup
Richard Ashbery (495) 163 posts |
Configuration Boot and Run-at-startup file location paths are greyed out with the Boot from HardDisc4 dated 23-10-12 when compared to a Boot dated 28-07-12. Removing a path to a program is therefore impossible. The RunImage in !BootApps, !BootBoot and !BootRun have changed. If the original RunImages (28-07-12) are substituted then the paths can be edited. Should I have done this and if so why is it necessary? BB running RISC OS 5.19 (29-Oct-12) |
Chris Johnson (125) 825 posts |
Perhaps you should look at this thread: https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/4/topics/1441 |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8173 posts |
There was a change, as mentioned in another thread,1 that changed the lines in PreDesktop and Desktop (both in the "!boot.choices.boot directory). 1 Back in July. “Start RISCOS” matches the behaviour of ROL sourced versions (as well as reflecting the fact that Acorn are no longer around) |
Richard Ashbery (495) 163 posts |
Sorry about that Chris. Yes I have just seen your original question. I will have a look. I still haven’t got my head around the ROOL forum and stupidly didn’t look in most obvious place – Bugs |
Richard Ashbery (495) 163 posts |
Thank you Steve for the clear and concise information for editing the above files. Having done this the ‘Configure.Boot’ entries are no longer greyed out. Presumably these changes will be reflected in future ROM/HardDisc4 releases. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8173 posts |
Already are I believe. In the intervening time I checked the content of a standard RO4.02 install and it too has a Start RISCOS entry rather than the “Start Acorn” I think somehow the Start Acorn came through the PACE era and missed the ROL initiated change of 4.02. Given that the 4.02 code was supposed to be passed back to PACE by ROL I don’t know why this one happened. Slow response – fingers a bit numb as Coleshill cemetary seems a bit wet and chilly. |
Chris Evans (457) 1614 posts |
All 4.02 code and some later did go back to Pace from ROL but AIUI only small proportion was included in Pace’s builds. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8173 posts |
It would be nice if all the later code went into the CVS.1 1 It would certainly make compatible updates of RO5.xx a lot easier |
Chris Evans (457) 1614 posts |
I don’t know if Pace passed on to Castle/Tematic/ROOL all the code ROL gave them. Passing over any other code is another matter. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8173 posts |
The purchase of the IP and rights would have involved handing over all of the property. The text kicking around at the time (from PACE) was to the effect that they retained the right to use (under license) and continue to develop (under license) their specific branch for use in embedded systems of their manufacture.
Indeed, however if the commercial use of the later code is defunct (I don’t think that OS version will run on any modern kit) then making the code available for possible integration would be a nice gesture to the RO users in general. The few long term users have suffered bad times, a few good times are in order. I think it might be nice if things like the Pi based machine from CJE could use any useful developments. Or the Beagle based machine from R-Comp, or even a speculative Arndale based desktop machine. |
patric aristide (434) 418 posts |
Anything concerning the integration of ROL code sounds like asking for trouble if you ask me. |
Rick Murray (539) 13855 posts |
I apparently don’t have the priviledge to delete my own posts forever, what chance spams? |
Rick Murray (539) 13855 posts |
It would be a very nice gesture, and God knows it would sort out diversion incompatibilities due to the two branches going in different directions; not to mention giving some faith and respect to certain individuals that their hard work still has purpose instead of what appears to be a branch of the OS no longer being developed (does the RO6 32 bit stuff work on any of the newer devices?). However… in certain shady alleyways, you start to talk about these things and there’s a definite chill in the air. I kind of expect to see stringy-haired-ghost-girl appear at any time… |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8173 posts |
I read that and the first image in my mind was a human apendix1 – absolutely no function apart from causing problems. It would be a massive shame if thats all it became known for.
Haven’t people loaded the toolbox modules or something? Mind you the problem is that a proportion of the applications that demand the ROL version number modules have other 32 bit or alignment issues. That just mixes things up and people assume the problem is the modules. Of course, while the only legitimate source for those versions or modules with those features is a site could just vanish it’s hardly prime developer material. 1 Too long working at a hospital |
Chris Evans (457) 1614 posts |
Whether they should or shouldn’t have passed things on depends exactly on the contract. But not ALL source code they had may have been handed over, even if it technically should have. ROOL can only work with what they actually have.
I would love all the Select features on our PandaRO & RaspberryRO but knowing the current situation I’m not holding my breath. For that to change quite a few people would need to agree to it. I’ve seen quite a few postings talking about the above situation, their tone would more than probably harden people’s reluctance to give code to Castle, so please no more here. |
Steve Pampling (1551) 8173 posts |
Ho hum. |