Interresting Website for ROS

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Dave3434
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:14 am

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by Dave3434 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:30 am

yes, but if pae is enabled by defualt older systems like pentium 2 won't boot. like ubuntu.

PurpleGurl
Posts: 1784
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:11 am
Location: USA

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by PurpleGurl » Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:06 am

Dave3434 wrote:yes, but if pae is enabled by defualt older systems like pentium 2 won't boot. like ubuntu.
True. Windows 8 won't boot on them either. In that case, the system would have to choose which HAL to use. Not sure, but I think the architecture determines the default unless there are overriding switches in the boot loader.

As for registry options I mentioned earlier, actually, loading switches might be appropriate. I believe that is the Windows way. If we (or anyone wanting to modify or fork it) vary the behavior here in any way, the load switches would be where to put it. Adding additional parameters or switch options wouldn't break compatibility. However, the devs probably don't see the value of that much work when they can just port to x64.

jihao1234567
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:53 am

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by jihao1234567 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 7:14 am

EmuandCo wrote:Because KernelEx just extends kernel with the the missing functions you need for more recent apps. It does not hack around any hardware side limitations.
PAE is of NO (tm) use at all for normal user mode apps. None of them is able to init more than 2GB RAM normally and 3GB with some nice tricks.
I don't see any reason to implement 36 bit addressing if it is not even useful for anything except some system mode services and apps.
At least Chrome could benefit from PAE( It uses multi-process architecture, i.e. every process has its individual address space ). Not all of apps need a 64-bit address space; for most small programs, 2GB is enough. Another point is the x64 ReactOS has a long way before it could be used( we should port key components, driver stack, etc. ), in this period PAE could help us a lot.
PS: Actually I think the AWE is a big hack, but PAE is not.

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4348
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by EmuandCo » Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:06 am

Where are your information from that X64 still takes ages to work?
Image
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.

Dave3434
Posts: 323
Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 2:14 am

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by Dave3434 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 1:58 pm

is it possible to let the en user to install PAE?

jihao1234567
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:53 am

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by jihao1234567 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:20 pm

EmuandCo wrote:Where are your information from that X64 still takes ages to work?
If you indicate "work" as booting in to system and loading all subsystems then initializing desktop, it might come soon. However considering that the x86 version's driver stack and some other kernel component are not stable enough for end-users' daily use, I believe that there is a long way before x64 could work( i.e. replace Windows entirely ).
PS: I've read an article said that from some aspect, x64 almost could be deemed as a totally different architecture with x86. How do you think about it?

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4348
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by EmuandCo » Mon Jul 29, 2013 3:13 pm

Sure, but different or not. Thats why we use a High Level language called C and try to get rid of as much ASM as possible. That way the porting is way easier.
Image
ReactOS is still in alpha stage, meaning it is not feature-complete and is recommended only for evaluation and testing purposes.

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by Z98 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:06 pm

The question that needs to be asked is not how many people in the community would benefit from PAE, it's how many of the active code contributors would benefit (and the answer is, if not zero, damn close). PAE is one of those features whose benefits are highly dubious when compared to a true 64bit port and since it also doesn't contribute much to compatibility (it actually makes things worse for the most part) it's one of those things that will see zero effort put in until someone who actually wants it puts in the time and effort to develop it correctly.

jihao1234567
Posts: 31
Joined: Wed Mar 18, 2009 7:53 am

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by jihao1234567 » Mon Jul 29, 2013 5:12 pm

EmuandCo wrote:Sure, but different or not. Thats why we use a High Level language called C and try to get rid of as much ASM as possible. That way the porting is way easier.
Hope everything works as you said. I REALLY HATE x64 binary code( especially when I should do some binary patching works ).
Z98 wrote:The question that needs to be asked is not how many people in the community would benefit from PAE, it's how many of the active code contributors would benefit (and the answer is, if not zero, damn close). PAE is one of those features whose benefits are highly dubious when compared to a true 64bit port and since it also doesn't contribute much to compatibility (it actually makes things worse for the most part) it's one of those things that will see zero effort put in until someone who actually wants it puts in the time and effort to develop it correctly.
OK, I have to say that you had persuaded me. I'll try to add this feature into ReactOS in my spare time after I reached US.

DOSGuy
Posts: 582
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2011 5:55 pm
Contact:

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by DOSGuy » Mon Jul 29, 2013 9:22 pm

Seriously, the PAE debate again? I just can't imagine who this would benefit. Are there a lot of people out there who have a 32-bit CPU/OS and more than 4 GB of RAM, and didn't anyone tell them it would be pointless to have more than 4 GB?

If you have a 32-bit CPU, or if you have a 64-bit CPU and choose to use a 32-bit OS, you should expect to be limited to 4 GB of RAM. If you need more than 4 GB of RAM, use a 64-bit OS. True, there's no 64-bit version of ReactOS yet, but ROS is only suitable for testing and experimentation right now anyway. (That's why it's designated "alpha".) If you want to run the kind of software that would benefit from more than 4 GB of RAM, then you really should be using Windows. PAE, along with support for NTFS/ext3/awesomeFS, is a "nice to have" feature that can wait until the "need to have" features are done. There are just too many higher priorities to expend a lot of effort to add a feature for George, the only person in the world who legitimately needs ROS to support PAE. I feel sorry for George, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. Live long and prosper.
Today entirely the maniac there is no excuse with the article. Get free DOS, Windows and OS/2 games at RGB Classic Games.

PurpleGurl
Posts: 1784
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:11 am
Location: USA

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by PurpleGurl » Mon Jul 29, 2013 10:35 pm

DOSGuy wrote:Seriously, the PAE debate again? I just can't imagine who this would benefit. Are there a lot of people out there who have a 32-bit CPU/OS and more than 4 GB of RAM, and didn't anyone tell them it would be pointless to have more than 4 GB?

If you have a 32-bit CPU, or if you have a 64-bit CPU and choose to use a 32-bit OS, you should expect to be limited to 4 GB of RAM. If you need more than 4 GB of RAM, use a 64-bit OS. True, there's no 64-bit version of ReactOS yet, but ROS is only suitable for testing and experimentation right now anyway. (That's why it's designated "alpha".) If you want to run the kind of software that would benefit from more than 4 GB of RAM, then you really should be using Windows. PAE, along with support for NTFS/ext3/awesomeFS, is a "nice to have" feature that can wait until the "need to have" features are done. There are just too many higher priorities to expend a lot of effort to add a feature for George, the only person in the world who legitimately needs ROS to support PAE. I feel sorry for George, but the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few, or the one. Live long and prosper.
First off, PAE mode is necessary to enable hardware DEP features. I shouldn't have to be more vulnerable to buffer overruns because I switched to ReactOS.

Next, if we have 36-bit addressing we should be able to use it. I read a site that said that it is not a hack. So if I have the 4 extra lines, I should expect to get to use them. If I have 8 GB, it should all show up because that is what the 4 extra bits are for.

At this point, Reactos won't fully work on real hardware, nor will it support everything that people have grown to expect under XP. We don't have a working 64-bit version either.

All this said, I agree we should focus on the more pressing issues. I hope it will boot on most modern hardware, with the mouse working and the USB ports working. The USB rewrite is not much better than the original code, and it is why some machines won't boot - the driver hangs. Sure, you can still disable the support in the BIOS to hide the device to get past the faulty code, but with modern machines, you won't have a mouse (or keyboard in some cases).

Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by Z98 » Tue Jul 30, 2013 5:36 am

PurpleGurl wrote:First off, PAE mode is necessary to enable hardware DEP features. I shouldn't have to be more vulnerable to buffer overruns because I switched to ReactOS.
And you won't be, if you run 64bit ReactOS when that port is completed.

Black_Fox
Posts: 1584
Joined: Fri Feb 15, 2008 9:44 pm
Location: Czechia

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by Black_Fox » Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:03 am

PurpleGurl wrote:if we have 36-bit addressing
And so I expect this problem will solve itself once we reach 64 GB RAM in our PCs :P

PurpleGurl
Posts: 1784
Joined: Fri Aug 07, 2009 5:11 am
Location: USA

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by PurpleGurl » Tue Jul 30, 2013 11:07 am

Z98 wrote:And you won't be, if you run 64bit ReactOS when that port is completed.
That is kind of like the joke about the guy who went to the doctor because his arm was broken in two places. The doctor said to avoid going to those two places.

Seriously, I sort of get your point. Most of the hardware that can do PAE can do 64-bit, and the old stuff that can't do x64 likely cannot do PAE either. While PAE should be enabled just for the no-ex feature, even if it is capped at 4Gb, you probably should at least add software overrun protection. XP uses both hardware and software protection, thought the software protection isn't that good (I know, both my neighbor and I used our machines without an AV, and only she got infected - I used AMD X2 64-bit in 32-bit mode, while she used a Celeron or P4 machine).

fred02
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:54 pm

Re: Interresting Website for ROS

Post by fred02 » Fri Aug 02, 2013 4:44 pm

jihao1234567 wrote:
erkinalp wrote:
Z98 wrote:PAE is a hack. I'd much prefer we just ignore it and focus on a true 64bit version for situations that call for more than 4GB of RAM.
If so, XMS is a hack too.
So the DPMI might be one of the biggest hacks...? Hmmm...I still remember a lot of games working with DOS4GW or some other DOS extenders in my young age, they worked well and the performance is also not too bad. At that time using DOS extenders might be the cheapest and most convenient method
No, they were legitimate efforts to ease up HMA access for programmers (flat addressing, protected mode). EMM was a hack. :twisted:

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider] and 7 guests