~OT: Computer misconceptions

From: Lawrence Walker <lwalker_at_mail.interlog.com>
Date: Mon Feb 8 07:44:01 1999

On 8 Feb 99 at 0:36, Ethan Dicks wrote:

>
> > > Surly the AmigaDOS Guru meditation was both earlier and more obscure?
>
> Earlier? Probably. The Guru Meditation number dated from 1985 (at least
> for those of us outside of the original program development). Obscure?
> I think not. You got two numbers: a 32-bit error code, most of which were
> expressions of MC68000 exception numbers (like odd address trap or bus
> error) and a 32-bit process address of the offending process. If you cared
> to, you could enter a ROM-based debugger (via the serial port at 9600 baud)
> and walk through memory to see why things went astray. Most people just swore
> and clicked the left button.
>
> Later, there were some great exception handlers that would translate the
> 32-bit error code into something meaningful inside the flashing red box.
> At first, we just looked up the number in the Rom Kernel Manuals (RKMs).
> Anyone who programmed an Amiga in the first five years got used to the
> most common 80% of the Guru numbers anyway. Usually it was something
> stupid like bolixing up an address register or accessing non-existent
> memory (except AmigaDOS 1.0 and 1.1 when a malloc failure Guru'ed the machine).
>
> -ethan
> (Amiga owner since 1986)
>
 Ahh, but neither could compare to the obtruseness and expressiveness of
the ST bomb images, up to 13 of them, each number of them having multiple fault
reasons. Or the fault #s you would have to translate to another # to look it
up in the fault chart.

ciao
lwalker_at_interlog.com
Received on Mon Feb 08 1999 - 07:44:01 GMT