Re: A82: Re: GWv2.0 bug/ASHv3.0 bug

To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org
Subject: Re: A82: Re: GWv2.0 bug/ASHv3.0 bug
From: mgp4007@omega.uta.edu (Michael Pearce)
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 1998 03:29:57 GMT
In-Reply-To: <b4d6cd8c.34e25f3f@aol.com>
References: <b4d6cd8c.34e25f3f@aol.com>
Reply-To: assembly-82@lists.ticalc.org


On Wed, 11 Feb 1998 21:32:28 EST, you wrote:

>
>In a message dated 98-02-11 18:16:55 EST, you write:
>
>> Speaking of too many shells, you may want to talk to Ben Sfarazza
>>  about Rigel (for the 85).  It uses fixed address relocation and
>>  updates the vat (i am pretty sure, anyways).
>>  
>>  -mike
>>   mgp4007@omega.uta.edu
>
>I think Usgard relocation is the best bet
>
>~Adamman
>

the Usgard method wouldn't allow for backward compatability of all of
the ash games already out there... definitely a bad idea.

-mike
 mgp4007@omega.uta.edu

References:

Re: A82: Re: GWv2.0 bug/ASHv3.0 bug

From: ADAMMAN106@aol.com