New Subsystem Ideas

[Pythagoras1]

it's just that important because there isn't any free implementation of the win16 api yet. well maybe os/2 might have a higher priority for the same reason too. .net is pretty important because newer windows software will be .net. an implementation could be managed by either porting dotgnu or mono. java ... well it was an idea to implement a java sub system. would be a fine to run java directly by the os . dos is less important because there is a free implementation called freedos.

and of course the same applies to linux. to make reactos posix-capable the core design would need to be changed entirely. these are two too different worlds; it's much simplier to port linux apps to w32, than putting tons of unix stuff like directories (usr,var,etc...), base utils (file utilities, perl, ...) and tons of libaries (gibc, libnearlyeverything) and last but not least a X11 server and client is required to handle the protocol gui apps use. well it's easier to implement cygwin for example which uses win32 binaries rather than elf.

i don't say it's a bad idea, it's just very hard and much overhead to combine these really different two worlds.

[TiKu]

I wouldn't scale importance on the question whether there's already a free implementation or not. Instead I'd scale it on real demand. How many apps, that require DOS or Win16, are used today? Is the number high enough to justify the amount of work to implement DOS/Win16 subsystems? I don't think so.
A .net subsystem... ...shouldn't be necessary at the moment. Just install the .net framework, DotGNU or Mono (I hope one of those will run on ReactOS someday). The situation may change with future releases of Windows that have .net deeply integrated.
I think the same goes for Java. Install a virtual machine and be happy.

Just my 0,02 €...
TiKu

[Quigs]

I might not complete understand the subsystem Idea...but could you port the cross platform COM Mozilla thing to be its own subsystem?
Would it run faster or is it a waste of time?

[uniQ]

i use almost noe 16bit app

You think you don't, but I was surprised when I found out how many apps I use have 16Bit installers, freaky.

-uniQ

PS.

DOS/Win16 (Either one, they're equal priority for me) are the only ones I really care about, I've never to my knowledge used OS/2 or POSIX subsystems.

[HUMA2000]

i know that some installer are 16bits, but not every apps use them, now, last versions of main apps came in msi installer, so no 16bits

[uniQ]

Still, enough apps have the oldstyle ones that I think it justifies having a decent W16 subsystem to deal with them.

-uniQ

[HUMA2000]

Well, them the list must be for me:
1- Win16
2- Posix (linux/unix//bsd)
3- Dos
4- OS/2
5- Anyother like BeOS, QNX, Amiga, SKYOS, etc...
.net and java must be supported by mono/dotGNU the first and any VM the second.

[Nixer]

How about OpenVMS subsystem?

[Harteex]

I'm going to update my opinion..
Win16 and Dos shares my first place.

to make reactos posix-capable the core design would need to be changed entirely. these are two too different worlds; it's much simplier to port linux apps to w32, than putting tons of unix stuff like directories (usr,var,etc...), base utils (file utilities, perl, ...) and tons of libaries (gibc, libnearlyeverything) and last but not least a X11 server and client is required to handle the protocol gui apps use. well it's easier to implement cygwin for example which uses win32 binaries rather than elf.

I don't know this stuff good, but NT had a posix subsystem and it didn't have all that.. how does the NT implemention work?

[ea]

I don't know this stuff good, but NT had a posix subsystem and it didn't have all that.. how does the NT implemention work?

ROS core (NTOSKRNL.EXE+NTDLL.DLL) need not to be modified to support a real POSIX compliant environment subsystem. Microsoft used to sell one named Interix, which is now a free download.

Microsoft POSIX subsystem is made of four binaries:
1. PSXSS.EXE: the POSIX subsystem server process;
2. PSXDLL.DLL: the client side library for POSIX programs;
3. POSIX.EXE: a Win32 "terminal emulator" to open virtual terminals;
4. PSXRUN.EXE: a Win32 program to run daemons.

The fact to keep in mind is that NT and ROS share the same design: there is the NT/ROS operating system in the core, but it is used only by device drivers and subsystems, not by user applications. User applications run inside a subsystem, that emulates a most common operating system, like Windows (Win32), DOS/Win16, POSIX, OS/2, VMS et cetera.

At present, ReactOS has only one subsystem really working: the Win32 environment subsystem. OS/2 and POSIX subsystems are partially written, but not working right now.

[Linuxhippy]

Generally speaking - if you really want a win16 subsystem sit down and implement one - I do not want to be unpolite but thats the hard fact.
The same for os/2, skyos, irix and all the other ideas - great - but it seems no one is interrested in doing this stuff - there are only guys who want this stuff done.

Win16 - Will decrease more and more in useage - not really important even today
Posix - A better Posix subsystem would be cool, but most posix apps are already available as win32 apps too.
Irix - Funny joke
OSX - Well if anybody feels comfortable with rewriting the whole carbon/aqua/applescript/etc. apis - great idea.
SkyOS - Just the same as Windows - Codes source - no apps not available on win32.
DOS - can be done through pc-emulators (maybe adopted to ros). Much easier and also works - highest performance not really needed for most dos apps.

Well, sorry for destroying your dreams *g*

[Harteex]

Thanks for the explaination ea

Generally speaking - if you really want a win16 subsystem sit down and implement one - I do not want to be unpolite but thats the hard fact.
The same for os/2, skyos, irix and all the other ideas - great - but it seems no one is interrested in doing this stuff - there are only guys who want this stuff done.

Ah it's the linux attitude?... a really nice one.
soo... you mean that the devs shouldn't care at all what the users wish to have?
Because if it's open source, let the user program it themselves even though they have never programmed before. Because technically it's possible for them to go learn and spend some years on fixing it themselves... woo...

If I develop an application I'm always interested in hearing what the users of the application wish to have.

Win16 - Will decrease more and more in useage - not really important even today

Maybe not for you, but maybe you shouldn't only think of yourself.
I have a bunch of old games I like and some of them are 16bit.

Also many applications which are still used today are 16-bit.

[solemnwarning]

16 Bit!

And Linux

[A-v-S]

Windows 16 bit !

If we want to be WIndows compatible, we need Windows 16 bit too !

[HUMA2000]

If you have read anything about the new upcoming windows xp 64, you will know that Ms have droped the 16 bit support for it OS, so, 16 bits installer will be ported to 32 bits soon I hope, anyway, a 16bits windwos subsystem must be implemented.