Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Roderick Klein

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 44
481
Applications / Re: Software Reports
« on: December 12, 2017, 08:49:37 pm »
Using ArcaOS 5.01

Installing eSchemes makes the whole system unstable.

Installing Animated mouse pointer 1.01 locks the system up. 

Both resulted in me installing ArcaOS 5.01 again.

If eSchemes failed while I was testing and it would hang the desktop.
Reboot the system to the command line. Rename the eSchemes directory.
Reboot, DLL's can no longer be found by the WPS.
Run Checkini.exe and presto. Or does that not fix the crashes then ?

Not certain if you can do the same with animated mouse pointers.

Roderick

482
Internet / Re: Experimental build of SeaMonkey
« on: November 28, 2017, 11:15:58 pm »
I've uploaded an experimental build of SeaMonkey 2.42.9ESR, https://bitbucket.org/dryeo/dry-comm-esr31/downloads/seamonkey-2.42.9esr.en-US.os2_exp1.zip
Optimized for size instead of performance, should fit into memory a bit better and almost as fast. Also optimized for a Pentium M so needs a CPU with SSE2 support.
You could also install it as if it was an RPM, putting everything in @UNIXROOT/usr/lib/seamonkey-2.42.9esr and a copy of seamonkey.exe in @UNIXROOT/usr/bin so it is on the PATH.
Same codebase as the latest release of Firefox. Once dmik releases another version of Firefox, I'll release the usual i686 build and if I ever get some guidance on building an RPM, I'll try to release them as well.
Needs the latest libcx and libc that are now available on netlabs-release RPM repository (I hope).

Note there also seems to be a regression with highmem support, marking xul.dll to load code and data makes SM unstable here on ArcaOS.

In my experience only load the code segments high, not the data segments!

I am running Firefox, Thunderbird and Open Office next to each other without an issue. Without loading the DLL's in high memory it toasts my system within a few minutes.

Roderick

483
General Discussion / Re: Good Bye Net Neutrality
« on: November 26, 2017, 05:28:29 pm »
This whole discussion about free market is somewhat of a weird thing in the sense that internet has simply become such a extremely key item in our world these days. Many things as business owner or private individual in the Netherlands you can simply no longer do without having internet access.  If you get unemployed for example 99% of the stuff needed to ask for unemployment can only be done online.  The internet is everywhere and its just as vital as other types of infrastructure (railways, roads and airports).

While the internet is operated by many different parties it is clear it has become a vital part of daily. It has also become a vital tool for our democracy to operate. That said it also threatens it, but that is live.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Net_neutrality_in_the_Netherlands
We have a large degree of network neutrality in the Netherlands but I wonder with the current right wing government how long its going to take before its lobbied away...

484
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 22, 2017, 10:57:41 pm »
Hi

Trying to move on there is a new post at OS2VOICE.
http://articles.os2voice.org/

It seems to be a good step on answering some of the "well funded" questions about the idea/project. I think think that Qt5 is something we need to support and that Bitwise works has shown the skill to deliver OS/2 projects on the past.

Qt's QtWebEngine seems the way to go to have a Chromium port or any other browser that uses Qt's QtWebEngine. Other ways may be too much time consuming or expensive. But if someone have alternatives it will be great to have the developers to back it up.


Regards

Thanks Martin for your posting.  I just want to emphasize that the complete posting on articles.os2voice.org has been reviewed by Dmitriy Kuminov  from Bitwise works.

Roderick Klein
President OS/2 VOICE

485
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 19, 2017, 01:27:07 am »
I am working on some more details answers and will post tomorrow.

486
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 18, 2017, 11:49:27 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".

For everbody reading this let just expand a bit more on this discussion about eComStation mis-management.
Because I think its time to set some misconceptions straight.

Sigurd wrote:
"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".

Without the whole eComStation project there would have not been OS/2 and it would have been long dead. I can understand from a customer perspective the product when it came to ACPI did not deliver what you where expecting off it, sorry about that. I do not think its rocket science to figure out however that both eComStation and ArcaOS mostly the same people where working at Arca Noae as the people that *helped* me at Mensys at the time. The guys at Bitwise works, Steve Levine, David Azarewicz ans Alex Taylor.

I guess its also no surprise that the research and development budget at Mensys never was not millions of Dollars for OS/2. That is/was no secret at all. I remeber the discussions in the public forums about how to manage a project. But with eCS we never had the budget for a large development team or a lot of project managers. Welcome to reality of keeping OS/2 moving forward with all compenents attached to it from browser down to all the drivers. 

When it came to ACPI and it not working I think its fair to say Pasha from the Ukrain did his very best. But ACPI is most likely one of the most complex drivers ever written for OS/2 outside of IBM. Anybody can say about eCo software and Eugene what you want, but eCo software got more projects off the ground such as ACPI and Panorama. Was it of a good quality ? Perhaps not what everybody wanted/was expecting but we would most likely not even be having this discussion in 2017 with the efforts ..

Later things did improve on ACPI  when David Azaricz stepped in at Mensys. And was BTW the person who invited David to start helping us out at Mensys at the time. But finding a developer that can write and debug that sort of code low level code is certainly not easy to find.

Mensys hired a company from the Ukraine to work on the Intel and Realtek OS/2 driver ported from Linux (this was not eCo software). They made the first Intel Gigabit driver based on Linux kernel sources at the time, that worked pretty good. When they started working on the Realtek OS/2 driver things started out ok, but ended in disaster of nothing short. At the company they had three project managers failed on trying to fix this trapping Realtek driver and 2 developers spent close to 6 months on this. Steve Levine also tried to *help* them to fix the kernel TRAP but it was not his job in this case. After the company told me that could not continue the project I went back to Steve it ook him 45 minutes to located the kernel TRAP.
The whole reason Steve never fixed the kernel TRAP was because it was the job of company from the Ukraine todo this.

The whole point being is that this management discussion with OS/2 projects is a bit more complicated then its sometimes presented in the forum.

So I can understand if you where not happy with how the project was managed overal. But it was done to best our abbilities and with the budgets we had to work. And as I always stated over the years a lot of money of sales was always reinvested in OS/2.

Roderick

487
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.

I will answer some your other questions  later. As for the drivers. I would like to refer to you to the presentation of David Azarwicz from Arca Noae in Toronto.

He is currently working on USB 3.0 host controller driver that can fit in the current USB stack.
UNIAUD based on technically dead and Arca Noae seems to be working on an audio driver based on FreeBSD audio chipset.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xuEoW_1cmgU
USB 3.0 is mentioned (around 20:30). I could not find the Uniaud portion in the train quickly.

Roderick

488
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« 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

489
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« 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

490
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« 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.

491
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 16, 2017, 11:30:01 pm »
Can you please provide more specifics instead of saying its based on buggy development tools ?
I don't want to bore here somebody with numerous links to bug trackers. People with working webbrowsers can simply use a search engine of their choice.
Quote
We have current GCC compilers for example
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).
Quote
and LIBC libraries are being updated.
Everybody can check on own system how "updated" the \OS2\DLL\LIBCM.DLL or LIBCS.DLL files are? Perhaps only you have a C Library Reference with additional updates to prove your claims.

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.

I you reference that LIBCM not being updated that is a DLL. So why does not need to be updated ?
We have plenty of new DLL's coming out that are in the Netlabs RPM repo that are being updated to support new ports.

Guys I guess we do have a new Tim Martin for os2world...

492
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 16, 2017, 05:23:14 pm »
These are some of the current compiler tools around for OS/2:
http://os2ports.smedley.id.au/index.php?page=copy-of-gcc-v6.x

The libraries are being up dated as we speak. Partly to accomodate Firefox:
https://github.com/bitwiseworks/libcx

So next time make things more specific and please stopping generic claims.

493
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 16, 2017, 05:17:46 pm »
Who knows how many things I've missed as I'm not following development as much as I used to.
They also recommend 16 GBs of address space to compile now, so basically 64 bit platforms. I think that is due to Rust. Eventually we're going to be left behind in a 64bit world
Whatever, for further Mozilla development the host build environment can be migrated to an OS/2 64-bit environment which is available (Windows Server 2008 R2 for example). The support for 32-bit target architectures has not been removed until now. But I'm not a spokesman of Mozilla. The current OS/2 fork seems to rely on too many buggy tools. There were no important OS/2-specific code improvements in last years at all. Addionally the newly introduced bugs become innumerable.

Look Andreas if you think our browser environment is so badly broken, specify in more detail how its broken.  The above claims are pretty generic and just completely scare people as if the browser is completely fallen apart. And that is not the case as I have mentioned some of the issue's Firefox has on OS/2 also plague it on Windows and Linux. 

494
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 16, 2017, 05:11:21 pm »
Who knows how many things I've missed as I'm not following development as much as I used to.
They also recommend 16 GBs of address space to compile now, so basically 64 bit platforms. I think that is due to Rust. Eventually we're going to be left behind in a 64bit world
Whatever, for further Mozilla development the host build environment can be migrated to an OS/2 64-bit environment which is available (Windows Server 2008 R2 for example). The support for 32-bit target architectures has not been removed until now. But I'm not a spokesman of Mozilla. The current OS/2 fork seems to rely on too many buggy tools. There were no important OS/2-specific code improvements in last years at all. Addionally the newly introduced bugs become innumerable.

And what do you mean with "There were no important OS/2-specific code improvements in last years at all."

Can somebody please delete this guy from the forums. Always so unconstrucitve.


495
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 16, 2017, 05:08:47 pm »
Can you please provide more specifics instead of saying its based on buggy development tools ?
We have current GCC compilers for example and LIBC libraries are being updated. If
you make a claim make it more specific instead of such a generic claim.

Ooh you said in os2.org that I was distributing hot or baked air. You just cored a home run.

Pages: 1 ... 31 32 [33] 34 35 ... 44