Well ArcaOS 5.0 is probably the last version for me.

[Neil Waldhauer]

On large disc bigger then 2 TB GPT is supported. So tha is off the table it seems that issue.

No, it is not off. If you actually publish a driver to split a larger GPT drive into 2 TB logical chunks, you are still limited to 32 bits. You have at most 24 drive letters x 2 TB, so you can sort of push back to 48 TB. File objects are still limited to 2 TB, and volumes are still limited to 2 TB. It's a hack, and while it would be a welcome addition, it is not the long term fix that 64 bit support could be.

(* can network directories be larger than 2 TB?)

[Dave Yeo]

Very large drive support is a different matter then 64 bit support, the problem there is parts of OS/2 that are still 16 bit combined with being stuck with CHS hard drive addressing. As it is, for JFS, there are parts of the file driver API that are currently 64 bits.
The drive letter limitation is also nothing to do with 64 bits, but another internal limitation.

[Paul Smedley]

Hi Neil,

(* can network directories be larger than 2 TB?)

I believe so..... My Shared drive reports: 2,908,314,763,264 bytes (2,708GB) free

[David Kiley]

I think AN do well the way they do.
An OS that only works in a virtual box is not really an "OS" anymore.
It would be just an interim solution for its own death.

I guess I don't see an OS loaded into a VM as not an OS. How do you see it so?
I have windows vista in a VM for some windows programs I have. If anything it's keeping the OS alive for me .

I agree that the future might be 64bit. But to be honest, for me I don't see any need for 64bit as long as i can do all i need to do with my "old" 32bit system. I am not a programmer and using my pc mainly for writing and organizing office stuff. What I try to say is, that it always depends what you need an OS for and what you expect from it. I really enjoy OS/2 since it is so very comfortable to work with it and i wouldn't want to miss it. And i am really happy that AN is doing a great job to keep it alive as an OS....

I could care less if the OS is 64bit per say, but my understanding is it might eventually make web browser compiling impossible - and hence that will/could kill the OS at least for people running it on bare metal and wanting to use the internet. Unless I am wrong about that?

[David Kiley]

Oh ye of little faith...

I'd say AN has delivered (or is about to deliver) on its promise of OS/2 on modern hardware.

Well to be fair I haven't tried installing the latest version on bare metal since I decided to go emulation - so from what you guys have said I stand corrected on that.

I'm not saying AN hasn't delivered on what they promised - they have done an amazing job. I'm just not sure "os/2 on modern hardware" should be the goal.
But, it seems that most people here think otherwise, which is fine .

[Roderick Klein]

I think AN do well the way they do.
An OS that only works in a virtual box is not really an "OS" anymore.
It would be just an interim solution for its own death.

I guess I don't see an OS loaded into a VM as not an OS. How do you see it so?
I have windows vista in a VM for some windows programs I have. If anything it's keeping the OS alive for me .

I agree that the future might be 64bit. But to be honest, for me I don't see any need for 64bit as long as i can do all i need to do with my "old" 32bit system. I am not a programmer and using my pc mainly for writing and organizing office stuff. What I try to say is, that it always depends what you need an OS for and what you expect from it. I really enjoy OS/2 since it is so very comfortable to work with it and i wouldn't want to miss it. And i am really happy that AN is doing a great job to keep it alive as an OS....

I could care less if the OS is 64bit per say, but my understanding is it might eventually make web browser compiling impossible - and hence that will/could kill the OS at least for people running it on bare metal and wanting to use the internet. Unless I am wrong about that?

Our live as OS/2 users has never been an easy one... We always have had the same issue's. Lack of software and/or drivers.  Especially since IBM stopped active developement. For that was circa
2002 when SWC program was active.  Maybe a year earlier they stopped maybe some people consider it later or sooner. But for more then 15 years we have been self sustaining with OS/2.
That has not alays been easy!

64 bit is certainly an issue and some idea's are around how to deal with the shortage of memory. The opinions seem to vary but we might have some options. I discussed these publicly a few months ago. As for compiling large projects such as QT and the webkit engine. Some things can be done to reduce the memory consumption. How that would memory reduction that would give us I would need to know by talking to Dmitry and especially Steve Levine. These are ungoing discussions.

Roderick

[andreas]

I think AN do well the way they do.
An OS that only works in a virtual box is not really an "OS" anymore.
It would be just an interim solution for its own death.

I guess I don't see an OS loaded into a VM as not an OS. How do you see it so?
I have windows vista in a VM for some windows programs I have. If anything it's keeping the OS alive for me .

An "OS" that cannot work on its own and needs to be installed on another OS is more or less just a program or add-on for this other OS...
ok, it's just a matter of the definition. But i still think an "operating system" should be capable to operate some hardware by itself...

[Neil Waldhauer]

Hi Neil,

(* can network directories be larger than 2 TB?)

I believe so..... My Shared drive reports: 2,908,314,763,264 bytes (2,708GB) free

Then there is a different limit for network drives, and that limit can be exploited to support large drive (greater than 2 TB). But large files (greater than 2TB) may be a permanent restriction given our kernel.

So there are a few ways to extend the life of the 32-bit kernel.

I'm not saying that the convenience of using the host operating system's support for WiFi, bluetooth and so on isn't worthwhile. I see Arca Noae does supply some documentation for running in Virtual Box and other environments.

[Lars]

ADDs allow 32-bit LBA addressing. With a 512 byte Sector size, that makes up for 2 TB as Neil correctly stated. And for an ADD, the LBA is an absolute value starting from first sector of the disc (as far as I can remember). Which limits the whole disk to 2TB or am I overlooking something ?
Therefore: a 32-bit IFS can address more space (even if it addresses bytewise) then an ADD. An ADD effectively addresses 32+9= 41 bits. The 32-bit IFS can address up to 63 bits (highest bit is reserved for sign bit to support negative file offsets).
That might also explain why network drives could be bigger than 2TB: you do not need an ADD to access data on a network drive. Instead, the IFS will in some form interact with the remote system to access a byte or more. If the remote system supports bigger drives, then that can work.

Example: the Virtualbox "shared folders" support only needs an IFS (for the OS/2 guest). That IFS directly interacts with the drive support of the host OS (Windows, via some access layer, I don't know the technical details).

[Roderick Klein]

ADDs allow 32-bit LBA addressing. With a 512 byte Sector size, that makes up for 2 TB as Neil correctly stated. And for an ADD, the LBA is an absolute value starting from first sector of the disc (as far as I can remember). Which limits the whole disk to 2TB or am I overlooking something ?
Therefore: a 32-bit IFS can address more space (even if it addresses bytewise) then an ADD. An ADD effectively addresses 32+9= 41 bits. The 32-bit IFS can address up to 63 bits (highest bit is reserved for sign bit to support negative file offsets).
That might also explain why network drives could be bigger than 2TB: you do not need an ADD to access data on a network drive. Instead, the IFS will in some form interact with the remote system to access a byte or more. If the remote system supports bigger drives, then that can work.

Example: the Virtualbox "shared folders" support only needs an IFS (for the OS/2 guest). That IFS directly interacts with the drive support of the host OS (Windows, via some access layer, I don't know the technical details).

From testing the current AN beta (I am on the AN testers list). This is what I can say:
The OS2AHCI driver version, starting at version 2.08 supports discs bigger then 2 TB.
http://trac.netlabs.org/ahci/browser/trunk/src/os2ahci/ReadMe.txt
 Changed the internal implementation of /U to accomodate gpt filter.
 Added support for 48/64 bit LBA operations.

So they have a filter driver that seems to care with this somehow. Saturday 5th of June Warpstock Europe, you can follow a presentation from Alex Taylor for more details.  Schedule to be posted tomorrow or today, check www.warpstock.eu for details.

Roderick

[Lars]

1) you are mixing up two points: there is a filter mechanism to suppress GPT disks (instead of erroneously accessing them) and then, there is 48/64 bit LBA support

2) 48/64 bit LBA support: what that can also mean is that the newer 48/64 LBA commands of the command set are supported, simply because newer drives don't support older 32-bit LBA commands anymore. Still, in reality, only the lower 32-bit will be set, the upper bits would be zero. At least I had to do some such with USBMSD.ADD (that supported only some very old SCSI commands with 21-bit LBA support, I updated to newer commands with 32-bit LBA support, supported by the current generation of USB MSD devices). But David will know for sure.

[Roderick Klein]

1) you are mixing up two points: there is a filter mechanism to suppress GPT disks (instead of erroneously accessing them) and then, there is 48/64 bit LBA support

2) 48/64 bit LBA support: what that can also mean is that the newer 48/64 LBA commands of the command set are supported, simply because newer drives don't support older 32-bit LBA commands anymore. Still, in reality, only the lower 32-bit will be set, the upper bits would be zero. At least I had to do some such with USBMSD.ADD (that supported only some very old SCSI commands with 21-bit LBA support, I updated to newer commands with 32-bit LBA support, supported by the current generation of USB MSD devices). But David will know for sure.

The storage driver provides 48 bit LBA addressing. And the GPT filter driver uses this interface. That way you can access a +2TB disc with ArcaOS.

Roderick

[Neil Waldhauer]

The storage driver provides 48 bit LBA addressing. And the GPT filter driver uses this interface. That way you can access a +2TB disc with ArcaOS.

As I understand it, the GPT filter driver will split a 6 TB drive into 3 units of 2 TB each, allowing you to access a 6 TB drive as, for example, E:, F: and G:. This is different from a single drive letter with 6 TB, which is currently only possible on a network drive.

[Roderick Klein]

The storage driver provides 48 bit LBA addressing. And the GPT filter driver uses this interface. That way you can access a +2TB disc with ArcaOS.

As I understand it, the GPT filter driver will split a 6 TB drive into 3 units of 2 TB each, allowing you to access a 6 TB drive as, for example, E:, F: and G:. This is different from a single drive letter with 6 TB, which is currently only possible on a network drive.

That is true! I think with my sleepy brainI did not read Lars his response correctly.
In my opinion this a pretty good solution. And I do not know if other OS/2 users that would object to having a JFS partition limited in size to 2 TB ?
At least we can now use discs bigger then 2 TB and with GPT without having being able to either user the hard drive or having to wipe it as GPT is not supported. It should make dual booting with Windows 10 easier then all the limitations that MBR disc layout has.

Roderick

[Fahrvenugen]

That is true! I think with my sleepy brainI did not read Lars his response correctly.
In my opinion this a pretty good solution. And I do not know if other OS/2 users that would object to having a JFS partition limited in size to 2 TB ?
At least we can now use discs bigger then 2 TB and with GPT without having being able to either user the hard drive or having to wipe it as GPT is not supported. It should make dual booting with Windows 10 easier then all the limitations that MBR disc layout has.

Roderick

Back in the days before JFS and LVM we had a similar situation with HPFS.  If memory is correct HPFS partitions were limited to 64GB, above that you had to create another partition with an additional drive letter.