Author Topic: OS4 question  (Read 2786 times)

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 38
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2016, 08:46:41 pm »
Quote
Doug, are you accessing the Windows icons in their binary package? If so, you could probably extract them, probably with a Windows tool, convert them into OS/2 icons (winico on Hobbes) and save them in the same directory with an ico suffix. Presumably the system will just load the ico file rather then hunting through the Win binary.

Hmmm. I never thought about that. Since I really don't care what icon gets displayed, i don't need to extract whatever might be in the file. I found a simple 888 byte window icon (OS/2 format), copied that into the folder, using the ico extension, and yes, it solves the problem (at least it looks like it has solved the problem). The folder also opens much faster, and I seem to have a couple of meg more free shared memory space. Free Shared Mem shows a short period where lower shared memory drops by a small amount (nothing like before), but it is far less likely to cause a problem. Now, to figure out how to get that icon copied, using the appropriate name, BEFORE I need to open the folder.

Quote
If you are able to open the .exe with 7-Zip, it has the ability to enumerate sub-components within the executable and extract icons and other files for you, and then you can use them that way.

Never thought about that either. It works, for some files, but not others. As noted above, I really don't care what icon gets displayed, my 888 byte icon is perfect for what I need, so I don't need to worry about extracting icons.

Thanks to both of you.

Andreas Schnellbacher

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 14
  • Posts: 236
    • View Profile
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #16 on: July 13, 2016, 09:13:55 pm »
Then, there is the legal grey area, which needs to be cleared up before OS/4 can even be considered by a lot of people.
If someone considers himself as absolutely white, he may use the official kernel and patch it  himself to OS/4 level but not use the already patched kernel that is being distributed. The patch will be provided for such persons upon their request.
I always thought that distributing patched IBM files was illegal. I remember Steven, who said that patching them in memory is not. I'm not convinced that distributed eCS kernels, which include patches from Holger and Steven, can be legally distributed, because the file itself was patched.

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 38
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #17 on: July 13, 2016, 11:41:51 pm »
Quote
I always thought that distributing patched IBM files was illegal. I remember Steven, who said that patching them in memory is not. I'm not convinced that distributed eCS kernels, which include patches from Holger and Steven, can be legally distributed, because the file itself was patched.

If Steven shows up here, he may correct me, but I seem to recall that he (or somebody who can distribute such things) got the okay to distribute a patched kernel (possibly other things) with eCS. I would assume that Arca Noae can get the same permission, since they are now the distributor for OS/2.

It may be stretching the point a little, but distributing a patch is definitely legal, and what a user does with a patch is up to them. If they choose to patch a file, then use that file for their own use, it is probably not going to be questioned. That may be a way to make the OS/4 kernel legal (or at least more legal than it is now). Distributing the OS/4 kernel, as a binary, is likely illegal, but it seems that IBM is ignoring it.

Rick C. Hodgin

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 12
  • -Receive: 2
  • Posts: 130
    • View Profile
    • Liberty Software Foundation
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #18 on: July 14, 2016, 03:44:36 pm »
Quote
I always thought that distributing patched IBM files was illegal. I remember Steven, who said that patching them in memory is not. I'm not convinced that distributed eCS kernels, which include patches from Holger and Steven, can be legally distributed, because the file itself was patched.

If Steven shows up here, he may correct me, but I seem to recall that he (or somebody who can distribute such things) got the okay to distribute a patched kernel (possibly other things) with eCS. I would assume that Arca Noae can get the same permission, since they are now the distributor for OS/2.

I was going to say I think Arca Noae has some recently obtained a similar allowance.

Quote
It may be stretching the point a little, but distributing a patch is definitely legal, and what a user does with a patch is up to them. If they choose to patch a file, then use that file for their own use, it is probably not going to be questioned. That may be a way to make the OS/4 kernel legal (or at least more legal than it is now). Distributing the OS/4 kernel, as a binary, is likely illegal, but it seems that IBM is ignoring it.

That's often a gray area.  It usually depends on how willing the copyright holder is to enforce their copyrights, which IBM doesn't seem to keen on if it's small scale.  But in general, it is always illegal to patch and distribute patches to kernels which are closed source and have all rights reserved.  Only in the case of express permission is it legal.

It's one of the reason I'm writing my own kernel from the ground up, and supporting their published API.  I do not intend to do any reverse engineering on their kernel, but to only figure things out through the various published APIs and public sources of documentation / commentary.  And may I say also that Martin has done the most amazing job I've ever seen of keeping an aging system like OS/2 alive and in focus/interest.  I am amazed and inspired by his dedication.

Best regards,
Rick C. Hodgin

R.M. Klippstein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 2
  • Posts: 205
    • View Profile
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #19 on: July 15, 2016, 12:10:41 am »
Hey Doug, Getting back to my problem copying files > 4gb -- I just bought a 32 gb Scandisk, used DFSee to format it jfs, but looks like that didn't work, can't make a directory - I get the error message "specified disk cannot be ascessed"!
  Do you have any good words on how I should be trying format this memory stick/USB Flash Drive?

thanks, klipp

Doug Bissett

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 38
  • Posts: 928
    • View Profile
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #20 on: July 15, 2016, 01:26:08 am »
Hey Doug, Getting back to my problem copying files > 4gb -- I just bought a 32 gb Scandisk, used DFSee to format it jfs, but looks like that didn't work, can't make a directory - I get the error message "specified disk cannot be ascessed"!
  Do you have any good words on how I should be trying format this memory stick/USB Flash Drive?

thanks, klipp

DFSEE doesn't format as JFS. All it does is make a volume that can be formatted as JFS, using the format command. In fact, it may be better to just use the Manage Volumes tool (miniLVM) to do the volume management. It still needs to be formatted as JFS though. I suggest that you do not use an advanced volume, use a bootable volume. It can't be expanded, but it is a bit easier to use.

FAT32 is a little different. DFSEE will format as FAT32, because the format command cannot do that, and Jan built the tool to do it.

R.M. Klippstein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 2
  • Posts: 205
    • View Profile
Re: OS4 question
« Reply #21 on: July 15, 2016, 04:03:03 am »
Thanks Doug, That did it I can now copy my large .vdi's.

klipp