15
« on: March 25, 2025, 11:32:20 pm »
Hello
I was wondering what would be required to run OS/2 over a different kernel.
Let’s theorize, what if we want to have PC that boots Linux, gets to the command line and run something like “startwarp” and the full OS/2 desktop will boot. (Command line, PM, SOM, WPS) and you can run your OS/2 applications there. (Not the 100% of OS/2 applications, but at least start with some)
What would be required to make the OS/2 binaries believe they are running over the OS/2 kernel to run interpretated and not emulating a x86 machine.
From my limited knowledge point of view will be required:
1.- OS2KRNL: The OS/2 kernel has everything that you need on an OS kernel to talk to the hardware, but those will not be necessary since the Linux kernel already does this with the hardware. What would be needed is a layer with all the functions that OS2KRNL provides to DOSCALL1.DLL …. I guess.
As far was a I know OS2KRNL provides a lot of DosXXXX functions to DOSCALL1.DLL. I’m guessing all of this needs to be cloned over Linux (maybe with libc/gcc) to make believe DOSCALL1.DLL that is talking to the kernel.
But I think I’m only talking about the API here, what about the memory management? Where it should go?
Does it make sense?
2.- MOUSE$, KBD$, SCREEN$, CLOCK$. As far as I know this are called “Character Device Drivers”. These are drivers that DOSCALL1.DLL and CPI uses. Here I don’t have the details on how these talks to the CPI. Some layer (DRIVER$ to Linux) to mimic the responses of these driver will be required.
There are a lot more for specific driver like USB, LTP, etc. are also required for software that communicates to hardware, but it had to start with the basic ones to first have a full OS/2 desktop and later improve it with better compatibility.
What would be the vital Character Device Drivers to start with?
Where can I found more information on how CLOCK$ (or any other interacts) with CPI or with any other software that requires it?
3.- Binary compatibility. I don’t know if its completely required that Linux has the “Linear Executable” layer like it was done on the 2ine project. But I think I’m missing this part. I guess that the OS2KRNL provides the instruction to let know that an ,exe file is a “Linear Executable” file, right? Where should that go if we are running a OS2KRNL faked in Linux?
Yes, I know that this theorical version of OS/2 will not be 100% compatible with all software, specially with the software that interacts with hardware. All device driver for OS/2 will be useless, and some new technique will need to be created to grab the Linux drivers and show it on the OS/2 environment (Ex: Linux Audio to UNIAUD1$ bridge). 16 bits may be broken and maybe not required today, VDM will be broken and there will be not full API compatibility first. A proof concept will have an awful compatibility first but it has the potential to grow if it’s open source and if people believe in this kind of long-term strategy.
This will not be easy, because it requires developers with OS/2 and Linux development knowledge to obtain at least a minimum of compatibility to make it usable.
Beside these three components that I theorize, what other thing will be missing to run an OS/2 desktop interpreted in Linux? What do you think? Please correct me where my interpretations of the OS/2 architecture are wrong.
Regards