Author Topic: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser  (Read 7931 times)

Roderick Klein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 8
  • Posts: 231
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #30 on: November 16, 2017, 11:50:17 pm »
Can somebody please delete this guy from the forums. Always so unconstrucitve.
The ignore feature works well: http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=lists;sa=ignore;u=41

Thanks I set him to ignore mode.

Andreas Kohl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 6
  • -Receive: 12
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
    • warpserver.de
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2017, 01:26:53 am »
I do not know what you talking about but Paul Smedley provides current builds of GCC 6 and 7 on his website for OS/2.
Only three errors in one sentence.
1. The current "supported" versions of the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) are Version 6.4 and 7.2. Neither full builds nor builds of a subset are currently available.
2. The mentioned download package comes not from his website but from dropbox - I didn't know that Paul is the owner of dropbox?
3. The mentioned download package is not a full package but a subset of GCC features (C and C++ frontend, gfortran frontend) - some tools but no standard C library or standard C++ library support included

Quote
I you reference that LIBCM not being updated that is a DLL. So why does not need to be updated ?
Sorry, it's totally incomprehensibly written. LIBCM is the multithreaded and LIBCS the singlethreaded module that implements C runtime library support under OS/2. I know the terminology is not fully correct.

Quote
We have plenty of new DLL's coming out that are in the Netlabs RPM repo that are being updated to support new ports.
Shared libraries (from a UNIX-like world) are quite different from "real" OS/2 DLLs. Everybody should use this bloatware really? Thanks for gossip and slander...

Dave Yeo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 8
  • -Receive: 100
  • Posts: 1382
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2017, 01:35:46 am »

But the examples are unfortunately missing here. Speaking about GNU's GCC there's no mention about OS/2 in the current supported releases (6.4 and 7.2).

Our GCC is a fork, forked back in the early 2.x days I believe, possibly due to RMS not wanting anything to do with proprietary systems such as OS/2.
IBM paid for the development of GCC 3.2.2-3.3.5 to replace VACPP rather then develop VACPP anymore, so it is our official compiler I guess.

Andreas Kohl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 6
  • -Receive: 12
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
    • warpserver.de
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #33 on: November 17, 2017, 02:22:00 am »
Our GCC is a fork, forked back in the early 2.x days I believe, possibly due to RMS not wanting anything to do with proprietary systems such as OS/2.
It's more complicated to expain it here.

Quote
IBM paid for the development of GCC 3.2.2-3.3.5 to replace VACPP rather then develop VACPP anymore, so it is our official compiler I guess.
A vicious circle. I'm only aware that it was used for the later builds of the IBM WebBrowser for OS/2. IBM C/C++ Compiler V3.6.5 was used for this task before. VisualAge C++ remained but lost it's OS/2 host and target support. They also shipped also a Version for Linux (PPC) that performed much better than Apple's GCC under MacOS X on a PowerMac. But in real world AD mostly IBM XL C for AIX was used. Now they call almost all compiler products XL C/C++ for the different platforms.

At least we have one "current" compiler for native OS/2: Peter's Iron Spring PL/I compiler. And how about the sleeping beauty of OpenWatcom C/C++?

André Heldoorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 38
  • -Receive: 9
  • Posts: 253
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #34 on: November 17, 2017, 07:54:36 am »
At least we have one "current" compiler for native OS/2: Peter's Iron Spring PL/I compiler. And how about the sleeping beauty of OpenWatcom C/C++?

</silence>
And Free Pascal (targets "OS/2 / eComStation" too), recently updated in 2017.
<silence>

Sigurd Fastenrath

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 14
  • -Receive: 39
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #35 on: November 17, 2017, 08:00:45 am »
Guys I guess we do have a new Tim Martin for os2world...

Even though I can understand the "heat of the Moment" it is allways contraproductive to argue with personal attacks instead of Facts.

Regarding the Topic / my questions there are still no concret answers from you.

Having no detailed Information about a plan and what will be done with the 10.000 Dollars at all was the reason why we handed the Money collected at the User Meeting in Cologne directly to BWW instead of this funding. Unfortunately this damages the whole funding and brings back memories of the past regarding Mis-Management of eComStation - Things I thought have been gone away because of the solid and good work ArcaNoae and BWW are doing.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2017, 08:04:12 am by Sigurd Fastenrath »

Silvan Scherrer

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 7
  • -Receive: 8
  • Posts: 141
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #36 on: November 17, 2017, 08:39:20 am »
Can somebody please delete this guy from the forums. Always so unconstrucitve.
The ignore feature works well: http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php?action=profile;area=lists;sa=ignore;u=41

Thanks I set him to ignore mode.

yes Ignore lists give a great feeling :)
kind regards
Silvan
CTO bww bitwise works GmbH

Please help us with donations, so we can further work on OS/2 based projects. Our Shop is at https://www.bitwiseworks.com/shop/index.php

André Heldoorn

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 38
  • -Receive: 9
  • Posts: 253
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #37 on: November 17, 2017, 10:44:58 am »
Ignore lists give a great feeling :)

kind regards
Silvan
CTO bww bitwise works GmbH

</silence>
No doubt that someone representing an ICT company must have experience with the, according to them, great feeling of ignoring customers in public.
<silence>

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 286
  • -Receive: 56
  • Posts: 1876
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #38 on: November 17, 2017, 12:50:26 pm »
Guys

I think you already made your point and you need to agree to disagree.  There is no need to compare or label people and it is not important who has the last word.
There are different opinions and that is all.

Back to the subject, I think that Sigurd has an important point and it can be interesting to hear a plan from OS2VOICE and Bitwise works about this subject and that Roderick update us on the fund raising and specify if he needs something else. I still think that this fund raising is in good faith and that Qt 5 is strategic for the platform. 

Quote
Guys I guess we do have a new ..

Please don't name him since it may be like Beetlejuice :)

Regards
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Andreas Kohl

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 6
  • -Receive: 12
  • Posts: 280
    • View Profile
    • warpserver.de
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #39 on: November 17, 2017, 01:41:52 pm »
At least we have one "current" compiler for native OS/2: Peter's Iron Spring PL/I compiler. And how about the sleeping beauty of OpenWatcom C/C++?

</silence>
And Free Pascal (targets "OS/2 / eComStation" too), recently updated in 2017.
<silence>
Last time I checked it targeted EMX (which means OS/2 2.x or DOS extender) with all bells and whistles. Existing EMX-based applications are easy prey - but on YUM-infected systems also an endangered species.

Pete

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 1
  • -Receive: 28
  • Posts: 624
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #40 on: November 17, 2017, 06:05:51 pm »
Hi All

At least we have one "current" compiler for native OS/2: Peter's Iron Spring PL/I compiler. And how about the sleeping beauty of OpenWatcom C/C++?

</silence>
And Free Pascal (targets "OS/2 / eComStation" too), recently updated in 2017.
<silence>


We should not forget Wolfgangs efforts in maintaining WDSibyl at http://www.wdsibyl.org/


Regards

Pete

Roderick Klein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 8
  • Posts: 231
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #41 on: November 17, 2017, 08:40:30 pm »
Guys I guess we do have a new Tim Martin for os2world...

Even though I can understand the "heat of the Moment" it is allways contraproductive to argue with personal attacks instead of Facts.


I welcome people there input in a forum. In my opinion Andreas had no good word left for my funding campaign I posted to os2.org, no problem. But when I asked him to ask questions and he does not. It seems he is just in the forum to spread negative messages and it seems not much else. Most OS/2 users are skilled enough to understand slightly  more then what he posts which seems point at some level of knowing what is he is talking about. But talking stand point the build tools that are outdated for example. If it was not for GCC we would have been dead years ago. So that is what I mean with un constructive attitude in his communication. The vast majority of new software is being compiled with these tools that Paul Smedley maintains in his spare time Dmitry from BWW and other people. A different attitude from his side is certainly in place. Some on Andreas his statements come across as political one liners with little technical foundations underneath it.

Roderick

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 286
  • -Receive: 56
  • Posts: 1876
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #42 on: November 17, 2017, 09:22:02 pm »
I welcome people there input in a forum. In my opinion ....

Roderick, please put any negative and non constructive comment to rest and focus on the important things. You are not forced to reply to every post. 

Let's move on. I think that it will be better to update us on the fund raising and to know if there had been any talks with Bitwise works about the project.

Regards
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Roderick Klein

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 0
  • -Receive: 8
  • Posts: 231
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #43 on: November 17, 2017, 10:01:51 pm »
Guys

I think you already made your point and you need to agree to disagree.  There is no need to compare or label people and it is not important who has the last word.
There are different opinions and that is all.

Back to the subject, I think that Sigurd has an important point and it can be interesting to hear a plan from OS2VOICE and Bitwise works about this subject and that Roderick update us on the fund raising and specify if he needs something else. I still think that this fund raising is in good faith and that Qt 5 is strategic for the platform.

Quote
Guys I guess we do have a new ..

Please don't name him since it may be like Beetlejuice :)

Regards

I post my thoughts about Andreas his posting in the reply to Sigurd. So far I have found Andreas his postings constructive and a lot of information missing.  To answer both Sigurd and Martin there questions. First of all thanks to a 5000 Dollar donation we are now over the 6500 Dollars boundary.

As for the funding project I explained this already in Cologne and in my VOICE article (articles.os2voice.org).

What I said in Cologne is partly based on what Herwig stated in his presentation he give via Skype at Warpstock Toronto this year.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9C6Hs-_Ung
19:33 24:00 minutes browser remarks from Herwig.
I also spoke to Dmitry from BWW for more then an hour on the phone who has been doing the Firefox development for the last couple of years.

The 340 Euro collected at your Cologne meeting SIgurd you say was directly donated to BWW. because of quote you where afraid of "eComStation Mis-Manegement".
1. The plan I put on the table was based on what primarily Dmitry told me from BWW.

2.  The money from VOICE the 10.000 Dollars would go directly to BWW. Who else should he hire and who would manage the funds after BWW is paid ? So I do not know what the relationship is with "eComStation mis-management".

The point is to what level of detail do you want to have this plan lined out Sigurd ?

I do not see much difference with how a funding campaign from BWW was put up.
For example:http://qt.netlabs.org/en/site/index.xml

Basically we have the following options as I described in articles.os2voice.org

1. Is Firefox and get the RUST compiler on OS/2. Based on what Dmitry said it seems currently this is the least likely plan to occur.
The other thing that makes Firefox a less useable is the product is the ever lasting massive changes that make Firefox extremely labour intensive to maintain on OS/2.
And this is not just because the Mozilla foundation removed the OS/2 code. Dmitry and other developers are not happy with this extremely rapid rate after the Mozilla foundations changes libraries and code. So this contributes to the possibilities of Firefox 57 ever making it on OS/2.

2. The other option is Pale Moon a split of Firefox 24. But how long will it take before the Pale Moon project potentially imports code from the Mozilla foundation
and we get stuck with Firefox issue's again! Dmitry did see this as an possibility this could happen.

3. A Q.T. based browser and Dmitry said that with webkit and Q.T. 5.9 we can either have one of the Q.T. based or Chromium.
Its true Herwig says it might not be possible. But the video that was recorded at Warpstock Toronto was older. I talked to Dmitry about 1 month
after Toronto. And he has been doing more research.

So point 1 and 2 are the least likely to happen. Point 3 seems to be the most likely.
Currently Firefox 45 is being finished for final release so collecting money for a new browser is it that bad idea ?

We aim at a new browser and all money is going to BWW and VOICE is just facilitating the collection of the money.
The Dutch VOICE foundation is Dutch none profit organization and its bylaws and the board of in total members make certain the money is spent wisely. So I hope this takes your concerns away regarding your concerns Sigurd about my possible mis-management.  I/VOICE will not be spending the money at BWW and will not be performing the development or coordinate the development of the software.

Roderick

Sigurd Fastenrath

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Thank You
  • -Given: 14
  • -Receive: 39
  • Posts: 353
    • View Profile
Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« Reply #44 on: November 17, 2017, 11:03:48 pm »
Good evening,

thanks for the words, Roderick, but I think this brings me no step further. But that does not matter.

Yes - I am of the opinion, that ecomstation failed because of mismanagement, sadly. And yes, the Situation about the "Browser of the future" reminds me of the Situation "the ACPI of the future of eCS 2.0".

When I collect the Facts I do have now, These are almost the same as the ones I already had the time I wrote my first comment in this thread.

- It is not clear what browser will be developed
- It is clear, that Firefox is not the path of the future (after 52), something you stressed every time but was clear to almost all of us when explanations came around because of the changes necessary (Rust and so on, please see other threads)
- I think it has been your words in cologne that stated that the 10.000 Dollar will be enough for about three months cost of developing, but as you stated as well, porting QT5 will Need about at least 5 to 6 month.
- So, to port a browser after that, even more time is needed (and so Money) and my be other parts have to be developed/ported as well to get a QT Browser running.
- If I remeber correctly at Cologne someone already stated, that it is impossible to port Chromium browser you mentioned, as it relies on several other Things. But I may be wrong.

So it is this mixture of uncertain plans and informations that are almost saying what is not possible but do not say where this path will lead to. And this is exactly what reminds me of the "eCS times".

I just fear (a bit) that this kind of Advertising such a Project will damage the solid and planfull work, ArcaNoae and BWW are doing.

In the end I think that a Firefox 52, when we will have it, will serve for another couple of years, and then all the other Problems, like UEFI, UEFI2020, USB 3, NVMe, Panorama, UNIAUD.... will lead to an end of OS/2 nativ on modern Hardware and I see no way that this can be stopped.

So, in my opinion, Money would be needed to Support current Hardware Features, like USB 3, WLAN (so many years missed now...) UNIAUD or what else - so desperatly needed Features.....to keep the current Hardware for some years. So: to develop Drivers.

Yes - I could raise an own funding for this, but for me it is just Hobby, so this example is just to explain why I do not see a plan behind this funding.

When the end on native Hardware will come it will still work in a virtual envorement, but in that a "usual" Warp 4 will do the Job as well. And in a virtual enviroment there is no Need for an up to date browser.

It is a pitty that you allways have this black or white sceme, if one does not understand or critize parts of what you are doing he automatically MUST be against everything you do or say.

But that is just my opinion. And it is OK as it is, I wish you all the luck for the future of your funding and the whole Project.



« Last Edit: November 17, 2017, 11:16:20 pm by Sigurd Fastenrath »