Could ReactOS be possible without WINE project?

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Nixer
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 7:02 am
Location: Russia, Moscow
Contact:

Could ReactOS be possible without WINE project?

Post by Nixer »

Could ReactOS be possible without WINE project?

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Yes possible but why would we since lots of wine dlls and windows dlls are just swappable. Wine has a sub project that builds there code for windows for testing reasons.

forart
Posts: 1050
Joined: Mon Nov 29, 2004 1:36 pm
Location: Italy
Contact:

Post by forart »

Well, I considered ROS a sort of "standalone WINE" some time ago, but I think that WINE will be considered a "ROS subset" in the future :D

BTW both projects seems to be strictly related. :wink:
»Forward Agency NPO
In progress we (always) trust.

Nixer
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 7:02 am
Location: Russia, Moscow
Contact:

Post by Nixer »

Why not to call it WINE/FreeDOS by analogy with GNU/Linux?

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

Post by Z98 »

Because we're not DOS. We're an NT kernel. And WINE doesn't provide anywhere near the utilities and other components that the GNU provides for Linux distros. We write a lot of the stuff ourselves. The way WINE code fits into ROS is nothing like how the GNU utilities and the Linux kernel work together.

Nixer
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 7:02 am
Location: Russia, Moscow
Contact:

Post by Nixer »

In fact Reactos uses FreeDOS code, or I'm wrong?

Radhad
Posts: 605
Joined: Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:09 pm
Contact:

Post by Radhad »

Nixer wrote:In fact Reactos uses FreeDOS code, or I'm wrong?
Why should it use FreeDOS code? It seems that you don't know the Difference between a Win9.x kernel and a NT kernel ^^

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Welcome to the super glue project.

Section in Reactos come from all over the place. Sections of cmd come from Freedos and Wine and Reactos own developers. Font rendering come from freetype. Other bits come from BSD. And the are a few Linux bits floating around as well.

So by fragments used you would go completely nuts trying to name it.

So we name it by its kernel design. Its a Windows NT Design. Ros does not have anything dos under it. cmd.exe from Reactos could be run on windows.

The analogy could be Wine/Reactos. Since those are biggest part. This would also be disrespectful to our fragments.

So lets just call it Reactos.

Haos
Test Team
Posts: 2954
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 5:42 am
Contact:

Post by Haos »

ROS has never been just a WINE subset. WINE is only the NT compatibility layer over Linux, while ROS is (for a considerable amount of time) a standalone, NT compatible, Operating System.

Yes, ROS project would be possible without WINE. On the other hand, we wouldn`t get as far as we managed to do right now, without WINE and WINE dlls especially.

Nixer
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 7:02 am
Location: Russia, Moscow
Contact:

Post by Nixer »

ReactOS command interpreter comes from FreeDOS, ReactOS command-line utilites come from FreeDOS. So FreeDOS plays the same role as GNU with GNU/Linux.

ReactOS is FreeDOS commant interpreter and utilities plus WINE with modified kernel (standard WINE kernel is closely connected with UNIX APIs).

So it is FreeDOS/WINE.

Ged
Developer
Posts: 925
Joined: Thu Sep 29, 2005 3:00 pm
Location: UK

Post by Ged »

FreeDOS comprises of about 0.1% of ReactOS, and Wine comprises of about 5-10% of ReactOS.

I hardly think this justifies us being a subset of either project

Smiley
Developer
Posts: 156
Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 3:36 pm

Post by Smiley »

Nixer wrote:ReactOS command interpreter comes from FreeDOS, ReactOS command-line utilites come from FreeDOS. So FreeDOS plays the same role as GNU with GNU/Linux.

ReactOS is FreeDOS commant interpreter and utilities plus WINE with modified kernel (standard WINE kernel is closely connected with UNIX APIs).

So it is FreeDOS/WINE.
So you mean that a command interprer and some command-line utilites combined with some dlls (from wine that are compatible with windows) can make an operating system ? lol

You also don't seem to know what is wine because wine doesn't have a kernel

oiaohm
Posts: 1322
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 2004 8:40 am

Post by oiaohm »

Wine kernel and Reactos Kernel are two completely different projects.

They don't share any source code in common. Due to this some wine dlls have to be patched to work on Reactos.

Reactos Kernel is own built beast. Please note the first Kernel used with Wine was the Reactos one. Due to running on top of Posix OS's it was not a good fit for wine. So they are completely different code bases.

Reactos kernel is a lot larger than wines kernel too. Reason Wines kernel does not need to know how to interface with hardware. Only with OS. Wine also depends on linux memory and threading management. Threading and Memory management is the key to any OS without them you don't have a multi user OS and big problems.

As Ged says there is bugger all FreeDos in Reactos. Windows is a graphical OS. Lots of that section was coded directly for Reactos.

At best you could do is as I said Wine dlls sitting of the Reactos kernel. Even Then its a barely call.

Note even GNU provides a larger block to Ros than Freedos. Ie gcc and binutils.

Note there are a lot of Ros only command line stuff too nixer. You are trying to build a line that does not exist.

After you start given the fragmented credits that make up Reactos you would end up saying stuff it Reactos is enough.

Code developed for Reactos is the largest block of code in Reactos.

Nixer
Posts: 94
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 7:02 am
Location: Russia, Moscow
Contact:

Post by Nixer »

Ged wrote:FreeDOS comprises of about 0.1% of ReactOS, and Wine comprises of about 5-10% of ReactOS.

I hardly think this justifies us being a subset of either project
I think GNU and Linux constitute even smaller part of an average distribution of the GNU/Linux OS.

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

Post by Z98 »

Except that GNU/Linux is describing the base operating system itself, not all the added on applications. When we say FreeDOS constitutes about 0.1% of ROS code, we're referring to ROS' operating system code. We're creating an operating system, not a distribution. We have the minimal number of applications that one would expect on Windows and that's it. We don't try and package thousands of applications.

Let's take an analogy, albeit a flawed one. To us, WINE is something like what X-Windows is to Linux. Not entirely accurate, but it's comparable. And yet no distro gives X-Windows credit in its name, nor are they expected to. Our current shell is also from a WINE dev (not sure if he's still with them). So that's kind of like KDE or Gnome or any of the other desktop managers for any Linux distro. Yet Linux distros in general don't have KDE in their name, with a few exceptions that are more for marketing purposes for the distro itself and not specifically to give credit to KDE or whatever.

Also, using FreeDOS in any part of the name would be incorrect. DOS is a completely different OS design than NT, which is what we're based off of. We do NOT use FreeDOS' kernel. Their command line might as well be what Bash is to many Linux distros. A part of that distro, yes, but that doesn't make any Linux distro a "subset" of Bash.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests