Porting ReactOS to different Hardware...

Here you can discuss ReactOS related topics.

Moderator: Moderator Team

Would you like to run ReactOS on another platform then i386, and in that case what platform?

Power Mac (RISC)
7
10%
Motorola 68k familly (Mac, Amiga, Atari ST)
3
4%
Comqaq DEC Alpha
1
1%
PocketPC/ WindowsCE hardware
8
12%
Other 32bit
4
6%
Other 16bit
0
No votes
Other 8bit
0
No votes
Intel 64bit
4
6%
AMD 64bit
39
57%
Transmeta Native
3
4%
 
Total votes: 69

uniQ
Posts: 246
Joined: Sat Dec 04, 2004 8:58 am

Post by uniQ » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:09 pm

HaH! ROS on mobile phones!!

-uniQ

PS. Moving to where
Coming on, coming up, let me help ROS and I'll be able to look @ a life well used.

avryhof
Posts: 35
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 7:56 am
Location: Brewerton, NY
Contact:

Velo

Post by avryhof » Fri Jan 07, 2005 1:33 pm

I dunno if I'd want it on my mobile phone, the screen is tiny.... Maybe my Philips Velo 500 Pocket PC? Or Palm?

Jondice
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:20 pm

Cell

Post by Jondice » Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:27 pm

I think porting it to the Cell architecture might be interesting. This architecture has a lot of promise, and if we want to be able to use conventional applications on it, Windows or something very compatible to it would be best for large Application developers. Of course, MS has their own reasons for not wanting to be a part of the Cell platform to say the least ...


ReactOS could have a really great future if the hardware vendors chose ReactOS somewhere down the road (both IBM and Sony are big on OSS).

EmuandCo
Developer
Posts: 4323
Joined: Sun Nov 28, 2004 7:52 pm
Location: Germany, Bavaria, Steinfeld
Contact:

Post by EmuandCo » Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:16 pm

Sony? Are you talking about We-release-new-firmwars-to-stop-Open-Source-on-our-lovely-PSP--SONY? I don't think they are interested in Open Source.

Jondice
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:20 pm

Post by Jondice » Thu Feb 09, 2006 11:52 pm

EmuandCo wrote:Sony? Are you talking about We-release-new-firmwars-to-stop-Open-Source-on-our-lovely-PSP--SONY? I don't think they are interested in Open Source.
Well any large company is only interested in OSS so long as it serves some need of theirs. Sure I dislike the fact that Sony does that sort of thing, but I don't think that changes my point.... they've both used OSS in the past, and really, IBM will be the ones you'd most likely be working directly with. They were the primary designers of Cell, and they are also the ones marketing it for things other than the PS3.

kelargo
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:25 pm

I vote for the DEC Alpha.

Post by kelargo » Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:45 am

Why?

Not because I own one, because I dont.
Not becasue its the fastest hardware out there, because it is not. (anymore)

The stated goal of ROS is to be binary compatible with Windows.

Jump into the WAYBACK machine, circa 1994, when DEC (pre-Compaq assimilation) gave a DEC Alpha to Linus in order to port Linux to
the Alpha Processor.

Remember, NT use to work on Alpha.

I just thought I'd be contrarian. :-)


least history repeats itself...
http://www.softpanorama.org/People/Torv ... teer.shtml

kelargo
Posts: 15
Joined: Sat Nov 26, 2005 10:25 pm

so I guess what I'm saying is...

Post by kelargo » Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:50 am

so I guess what I'm really saying is...

Someone in IBM needs to step up to the plate and donate some
dual core G5 PowerPCs to the dev team!

And someone at AMD needs to do the same with some dual core Athlon64 systems!

:wink:

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

Post by oiaohm » Fri Feb 10, 2006 12:54 am

Amd 64 will take a little bit for work updating the Mingw complier.

Most of the Code for the Amd 64 is done right ie not drivers. Could be shared with the Intel 64 modern. They did aggree on a common section.

Anything non 32 bit will for sure require a mingw update.

Gcc supports Amd64 bit no problem. mingw runtime w32api gcc and binutils does not. Ie we need a w64api and a 64 bit runtime. Lot of work required here and 64 bit pe support added to binutils.

Yes Microsoft complier supports it but the licence if it is not set in stone.

Jondice
Posts: 4
Joined: Thu Feb 09, 2006 9:20 pm

Post by Jondice » Fri Feb 10, 2006 2:45 am

That'd be nice Kelargo, I wish I could help heh.

I agree that AMD 64 is probably the most important target, since Windows has already been ported to it. If you wanted to pick a totally unrelated architecture, I think Cell is where its at.

Matthias
Posts: 496
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2005 12:43 am

Post by Matthias » Sat Feb 11, 2006 12:51 pm

solemnwarning wrote:I Do Have A Router Already Running Smoothwall Linux, I Want To Run A Decent Distro But Most Crash On Install:

PII MMX
64Meg DIMM Ram
1.9Gig HDD
16X CDROM

I Might Get A Better Box From The Dump So I Can Run Fedora As A Router, Maybe
Will you *please* stop to start every word with a capital letter? This is sooooo annoying....

Besides that, we might do something like mozilla with their "tier" Platforms.
From Mozilla.org
Tier-1 platform refers to platforms that are the primary focus for development. Major problems on these platforms are considered showstoppers. [...]

Tier-2 platforms are platforms for which a small varying subset of developers & contributors actively try to maintain but general development does not halt for problems on these platforms. [...]

Tier-3 platforms are those platforms which generally are not actively worked on by the main developers of the project but have fixes contributed by third parties. [...]
Tier-1 platforms would definately be IA32, IA64 and AMD64 (because Windows supports these now), Tier-2-Platforms would be PowerPC and perhaps Alpha and MIPS, because Windows used to run on these.

However i think that the developers should focus on making working versions for IA32 processors before porting ReactOS to other processors. What the ReactOS project needs is developers, and most developers have an IA32 box at home so that they can try to run ReactOS. On the other hand, i hardly believe that somebody wouldn't contribute just because there is no, say, PowerPC port.

Jaix
Moderator Team
Posts: 838
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 3:40 pm
Location: Sweden, Växjö

Re: Cell

Post by Jaix » Sat Feb 11, 2006 5:08 pm

Jondice wrote:I think porting it to the Cell architecture might be interesting. This architecture has a lot of promise, and if we want to be able to use conventional applications on it, Windows or something very compatible to it would be best for large Application developers. Of course, MS has their own reasons for not wanting to be a part of the Cell platform to say the least ...


ReactOS could have a really great future if the hardware vendors chose ReactOS somewhere down the road (both IBM and Sony are big on OSS).
Yes, just think about the new cellphones with masterdon screens and touch-sceen, I would love to be able to run compact windows-apps on them, but I guess we need a really compact version of ROS much like WinCE a ROS-CE and I know there are already plans on making souch an effort, very interesting. I wonder if that one is supposed to be Win or WinCE binary compatible or perhaps .NET (Mono).

Wierd
Posts: 147
Joined: Sat Dec 18, 2004 10:12 am

Post by Wierd » Thu Feb 16, 2006 8:44 pm

Because most cellular manufacturers cannot agree on what internal architecture should be inside a cellular device, the gold standard for cellular devices is Java Midlet.

The Java Midlet spec is rather weak at best--- not even giving access to the phones raw abilities. I really dont see how you could put ReactOS on a cellular device, unless it DIDNT run everything as a Java Midlet. I nderstand that there are a FEW such devices.............. but not very many.

Jaix
Moderator Team
Posts: 838
Joined: Sat Nov 27, 2004 3:40 pm
Location: Sweden, Växjö

ROS-CE on all Windows Mobile and palm phones...

Post by Jaix » Mon Feb 20, 2006 5:07 pm

Wierd wrote:Because most cellular manufacturers cannot agree on what internal architecture should be inside a cellular device, the gold standard for cellular devices is Java Midlet.

The Java Midlet spec is rather weak at best--- not even giving access to the phones raw abilities. I really dont see how you could put ReactOS on a cellular device, unless it DIDNT run everything as a Java Midlet. I nderstand that there are a FEW such devices.............. but not very many.
Well, there is many phones that suites ROS well for the future, for example all Windows Mobile Palm, and linux phones should be able to have ROS ported to them. Then we have the nokia symbian phones that should be possible to use too.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 4 guests