Author Topic: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel  (Read 8910 times)

Lars

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1439
  • Karma: +72/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #15 on: June 30, 2025, 11:15:03 am »
What is now left to do is to persuade ChatGPT to write the code for you.
« Last Edit: June 30, 2025, 11:33:06 am by Lars »

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5352
  • Karma: +44/-1
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #16 on: June 30, 2025, 04:02:14 pm »
What is now left to do is to persuade ChatGPT to write the code for you.
I'm waiting for that AI tool  ;D ;D ;D
Martin Iturbide
OS2World NewsMaster
... just share the dream.

Igor

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 114
  • Karma: +12/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #17 on: June 30, 2025, 09:56:03 pm »
I want to offer you two interesting articles.
They are in Russian, but I think the Google translate will cope.
http://ru2.halfos.ru/core/articles/core003.html
http://ru2.halfos.ru/core/articles/core001.html

Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5352
  • Karma: +44/-1
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #18 on: June 30, 2025, 11:27:41 pm »
Thanks Igor for the link. I didn't know that Valery wrote those articles.

I know that Yuri Prokushev and Valery worked a lot on the OSFree project, but I was never able to translate their progress to try to send news to the community. I was hoping that OSFree can do some little progress and generate software things that the OS/2 community can use, so they can gain recognition and move forward to the final goal, but it didn't happen.

The idea of using the L4 Microkernel was great, but maybe we need more popular kernel like the Linux one. My idea of using Zircon is just a wild shot brainstorming since I want a Microkernel too.

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

jmase

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #19 on: July 02, 2025, 05:03:37 pm »
What do Haiku OS, OpenBSD, Redox OS, ReactOS (and so on) have in common? They are opensource.
And they all have a active development community.

Is the OS/2 source needed to put OS/2 on another kernel?
Strictly no, but the source would help alot to understand how apps talk to the kernel.

Opensource could make it interesting for people to look how it was made, get new people interested
in creating a modern (64bit) OpenOS/2.

Maybe a petition to IBM to opensource what they can would work now, so many years has passed...
(or ask them if the leaked sources can be used ;)



The kernel used should be the Linux kernel, not that its a great kernel but its activly developed,
supports almost all hardware and there are tons of people who knows how it works.
Implementing support for things like 16bit apps on a modern OS is not easy,
but using a really well known kernel with loads of developers would help.



Martin Iturbide

  • OS2World NewsMaster
  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5352
  • Karma: +44/-1
  • Your Friend Wil Declares...
    • View Profile
    • Martin's Personal Blog
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #20 on: July 02, 2025, 05:48:44 pm »
Hello jmase. It is good to see you around.

I don't have answers, just opinions  :D

What do Haiku OS, OpenBSD, Redox OS, ReactOS (and so on) have in common? They are opensource.
And they all have a active development community.
Just as FYI:
- HaikuOS (Microkernel)uses "NewOS kernel" developed by Travis Geiselbrecht. Travis worked on the BeOS kernel, Haiku OS Kernel and now he is working at Google in the FuchsiaOS project (Possible on the Zircon Kernel)
- ReactOS (Microkernel) has  the "ntoskrnl" which is a kernel to be compatible with the NT Kernel.
- Redox OS (Microkernel) has a kernel made in rust.
- OpenBSD (monolithic)
I agree, if it is open source it has a better change to survive over time.

Quote
Opensource could make it interesting for people to look how it was made, get new people interested
in creating a modern (64bit) OpenOS/2.
You all know I'm a supporter of Open Source since a lot of time. Open source allowed us to keep using OS/2 today, we had took a lot of the Open Source community. It is not for me as "Open = Good" and "Close = Bad", it is more like "Open = Better", since it is better to have the source code and binaries instead of only the binaries.

Quote
Maybe a petition to IBM to opensource what they can would work now, so many years has passed...
(or ask them if the leaked sources can be used ;)
I am tempted to request it again to IBM, this time Arvind Krishna, the OS/2 sources, or partial sources, the OS/2 PowerPC source,  permission for the leaked source or even a license change to the IBM device driver kit source code that can be open source friendly... anything. But it is possible that we did not get a reply or something similar of the last time with Sam Palmisano, but you know the expression " ‘No’ is Guaranteed ", so what can we loose asking again?

Quote
The kernel used should be the Linux kernel, not that its a great kernel but its actively developed, supports almost all hardware and there are tons of people who knows how it works. Implementing support for things like 16bit apps on a modern OS is not easy,
but using a really well known kernel with loads of developers would help.
I always loved the "Microkernel" idea and even the "Workplace OS" idea. I even think that the Android fragmentation problem was in part because of the Linux monolithic kernel (accompanied with the manufacturers that were so profit oriented and didn't want to compile new versions on the old devices). But I have to agree that the Linux kernel is widely used and possible the best option. I think it is the best shot because there is more knowledge of that kernel in general.

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

jmase

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
  • Karma: +1/-0
    • View Profile
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #21 on: July 05, 2025, 09:39:36 am »
Opinions är good  :)

You have the platform for asking IBM, established and active site!
Maybe doing a sort of press release that can be picked up on news sites so that IBM can feel a little more pressure. If they say no they do it in a public setting and risk being "anti-opensource".

OS/2 PPC is probably a better/cleaner source, they said back then there was a lot rewritten.
Maybe offer IBM a NDA for a group of people that would check out the source for possible problems.
Same here, if there are things that are owned by (for example) Adobe, would they want to be seen as "anti-opensource" for code that is like 30 years old.

Ian B Manners

  • Global Moderator
  • Sr. Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 479
  • Karma: +10/-0
  • I am the computer, it is me.
    • View Profile
    • ComKal Networks Australia
Re: Brainstorm: OS/2 on a Different Kernel
« Reply #22 on: July 05, 2025, 04:00:41 pm »
Hi jmase,

For IBM, and the world, it is not about being anti opensource but the fact the OS/2 contains propriety code from many other companies, including Apple, Amiga, Microsoft and many more that IBM has no control over the copyright to that source.

The cost and resources required for IBM to separate the code that it does own from the code that it does not outweighs any benefit IBM would get from doing so, and it would still risk accidentally releasing code it has no rights to.

IBM has been shown to be very open to open sourcing the program code that it has 100% control over including JFS. IBM has made over 400 of its patented technologies available for free to the open-source community from about 2005, there have been hiccups but overall that seems to have worked. The company has also donated entire projects to the Apache Foundation and others. IBM isn't perfect but compared to some other companies its doing ok.

We can be pushy with IBM but we also need to do it in a professional manner.
Cheers
Ian B Manners