"React16" and "React98" concepts Viable?

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

z180
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:58 pm

Post by z180 »

HAIKU made much progress in the last years.The original name was
OpenBeOS if i am right.Aso there is an BeOS like operating system
called Sllable that is small and fast and C++.GUI and driver apis
are to nothing compatible but it can compile C posix text mode
programs and has a port of WINE.Syllable uses much more C code
in the kernel which allowed porting drivers from the very differently linux kernel which also is an idea for reactos to gain support for hardware
that is common.Someone tried to remake OS/2 but did not get very far.
There is an remake of UNIX from 1990 for Z80 systems called UZI which was spawned 3 different versions UZI280 UZIX and UZI 180.Also there
is some code available from reactos/9x that should be compiled with DJGPP.In SVN browser set revision to 2.The Freedos project is also impressive but as GUI you could use GEM which is much more limited than windows 3.1 bu has an black and white Macintosh/LISA like look.
oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

OS/2 remake is still under way. The wasted many years trying to demand IBM to open source the OS/2 code base.

There is a chance the OS/2 remake has started when there numbers of supporters have died out too much. Also it has to compete against http://i1.dk/ntos2/, http://voyager.netlabs.org and http://os2linux.sourceforge.net/. So there are good chances even the OS/2 warp clone will just die out completely and in about 5 years most people will have forgotten the need and the most important people have forgot need hardware makers.

Its not really Reactos job to rescue these dieing markets. Also no point trying to rescue them since binding to a dieing driver system also limits the possible live of any 9x clone project.

Now if someone wants to work on a better emulation system inside NT now that might be a useful project to Reactos.

Even Freedos highly functional clone of a dead OS. Has trouble on some hardware. Why simple no more drivers.

Reactos main advantage will be its use of Windows drivers.

Note Z180 newer Syllable is using a Linux kernel. Its server form. So port of wine to its desktop is no different to wine port to other Unix's.

Syllable desktop core is more Unix style so wraping Linux drivers in is fairly simple. Wrapping Linux drivers to NT does come with a lot of issues. The internal designs of both OS's are massively different.
forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart »

oiaohm wrote:Just patching the old Win9x is making sure of long term death. Reason no new members legally. So all those patches have really been people wasting there time forart. Either they truly work on a project to replace there OS or they die out the question is how long.
I agree, but that's the reason fo switch to open source.
patchworks wrote:
saugatak wrote:Win98 is crap. Why bother spending any time and effort on it.
This sounds like an insult (to me) for the active people that works on Unofficial Service Packs ! :}

My idea is to WRITE (or better, to gradually substitute) any windows 9x component with an open source one.
Why 'wasting' time on closed source Service Packs (that is unauthorized in any case), when you can save an os _permanently_ from the certain death ?
:roll:
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.
oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

forart serious question are any of the developers left untainted enough even to attempt to save it.

There is a real risk that its already too late. All the developers that did have the skill have completely tainted themselves building these third party hacks to keep the OS going. This is why I 100 percent frown on people keeping OS's alive threw third party patching. Most of the time they are killing the OS off faster by 1 by 1 removing programmers from the available pool.

Reactos has enough internal issues without intentionally inviting problems.

Patchworks gradually substitute can be a very tricky legal path. If following that path all legal understanding of how to do it needs to be put in place first.
Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

forart and Patchworks are the same person.
lakehousetech
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:03 am
Location: NY

Post by lakehousetech »

Ok, I don't want to irritate any more developers (Ged) , but I have a couple questions somewhat related to this post...

How come ReactOS has been in alpha for so long? Have there been a lot of growing pains since switching focus to an NT similar system from legacy/9x? Even if you consider that XP was released around 2001, that still means that this project has been in alpha for a very long time.

Is 16bit support getting dumped (like MS did when releases Vista)?

I hope that this isn't taken the wrong way. I am purely curious. I am interested in the project, and am in now way criticizing anyone. I understand that this is a community based project and that there has been some turnover in the development here and there. Thanks.
Last edited by lakehousetech on Fri May 02, 2008 3:25 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Z98
Release Engineer
Posts: 3379
Joined: Tue May 02, 2006 8:16 pm
Contact:

Post by Z98 »

Let's put this into perspective. ROS is, by all means, a massive undertaking. What we are trying to do is the equivalent of writing the Linux kernel, the X Windows System, Qt or Gtk, KDE or Gnome, take your pick, and the various utilities that come with a standard Linux distro, from scratch, by one team.

It took Linux 17 years to get where it is now, and this is with hundreds of programmers worldwide and massive corporate support. It took KDE 12 years to get where it's at. It took X Windows, assuming we're referring to the X11 protocol and not the original, 21 years to get where it's at. Qt, about 17 years as well. And if we're also being generous regarding GNU, it took them maybe 20 years to get where they are. We've been around for maybe 12 years.

Even if we account for the fact that we used a lot of Wine code, which is analogous to not needing to develop "Qt," we're still looking at a massive undertaking, combined with the fact our manpower and funding is minuscule compared to all the resources those other projects have had.

When compared with all those other projects out there, we're just barely at the halfway point to reaching the level of maturity they've achieved, if we looked strictly at development time.

We never had 16bit support, at least not the way you mean it.

No code was ever produced for ROS that targeted the 9x platform. While it is true ROS started from people who expressed interest in an open source 9x platform, that project never produced any code.
lakehousetech
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 6:03 am
Location: NY

Post by lakehousetech »

That definitely puts things in better perspective for me. I guess I have taken a bit for granted. I have followed linux for the past five years, and seen some great leaps in terms of usability from there end. I had no idea how much time some of the window managers have been in dev. I am more familiar with the kernel development, but that's more often what I hear about. Thanks for the response. It has clarified many things. Keep up the good work!
etko
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu May 26, 2005 3:43 am
Location: Slovakia
Contact:

Post by etko »

Z98 thanks too for amazing eyeopener by fitting things into perspective !!!
MadWolf
Posts: 577
Joined: Sat Dec 31, 2005 4:19 am
Contact:

Post by MadWolf »

hi
waste of energies to work unofficially for a proprietary OS (have you heard about the recent AutoPatcher XP shutdown ?).
that is old news thay are back
http://www.autopatcher.com/downloads/

good reasons for 16bit/9x for classic games like C&C95 you can get a free copy @

http://www.fileplanet.com/180464/180000 ... (Complete)
oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Not really MadWolf. http://freecnc.org/ Lot of teams are working on reversing lot of different game engines.

So overtime less and less is really being left. So either people will reverse 9x or reverse the game engine. Its more likely that people will reverse the game engine why improvements.
fred02
Posts: 551
Joined: Thu Nov 22, 2007 5:54 pm

Post by fred02 »

oiaohm wrote:So overtime less and less is really being left. So either people will reverse 9x or reverse the game engine. Its more likely that people will reverse the game engine why improvements.
Not really oiaohm :D , for instance the last freecnc.org update is dated December '06 , and no downloads. Besides engines will (may be) redone for top hit games, such as C&C, but all the others will be tied forever to their original OS. :x
z180
Posts: 197
Joined: Sat Mar 10, 2007 7:58 pm

Post by z180 »

There is a possible solution for unsupported Hardware for which the user
has a VXD virtual deviceand the hardware is not used by ReactOS.the VXDs communicate with the VMM whichis the 32-bit kernel since windows/386 and supports some restricted multitasking(multiple DOS-boxes).A skilled person could writea VXD driver for ReactOS that allocates kernel memory for the VXD, loads a LE binary
and supplies many VMM funtions and is reentrant which the windows
VMM is not.Noone had written a LE format loader yet,wine fakes only
some vxd functions.
zydon
Posts: 160
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 9:03 am

Post by zydon »

In that case z180, if the virtual VXD is the only solution for supporting win31/9x legacy software, then the need of separate version of OS is not neccessary.

I even thinking of virtual compatibility software for NT based OS which is allows each legacy software running in it's virtual box with customize environment.

The 'virtual compatibility box' not require the whole Win31/9x OS to be install. Instead only installing device drivers for each environment type and then it will re-direct it to the host devices. It's is kind of running Wine on Win NT/XP with it's own desktop without interfering the host devices directly.

But I don't know if Wine is possible under WinXP or React OS that way. I did see there is a win32 version of Wine but has not found any documentation on how to use or examine them under Windows OS environment.

If the above methods is possible to work, it mean allowing the Win31/9x software using existing 3D gfx card and sound hardware as well and running with it's familiar environment, system timing & gdi engine and accessing direct 'virtual' hardware.

I think it need a lots of DLL calls intercepting and emulate the environment in virtual compatibility box without having actual system DLLs. It may similar to console games emulators.
Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos »

@zydon

Either it is gonna be a virtual machine within the system, with all its vices (mainly performace issues), or we have to let them access hardware directly, with all security/stability issues.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: DotBot [Crawler], Semrush [Bot] and 1 guest