OS2 World Community Forum

OS/2, eCS & ArcaOS - Technical => Applications => Topic started by: Martin Iturbide on December 30, 2014, 06:01:37 pm

Title: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on December 30, 2014, 06:01:37 pm
Hi

Since WarpStock 2014 (October 24-26) I haven't got any news from Mensys about eComStation. At WarpStock Menso told us that they were working on an agreement with Arca Noae, reorganization,  Joachim was becoming the product manager, and that they are moving on. But for the moment no news or formal statements had been released.

Instead of commenting about Mensys situation or making speculative statements maybe we should start thinking about alternatives for the community.

The good thing from Arca Noae is that they made commercially available "the crown jewel of drivers" for OS/2 users, so there is not dependency on buying the full eCS anymore to get the ACPI driver.

The issues remains in:
1) You can not buy new licenses of OS/2 legally. OS/2 Warp 4.52 it is abandonware, which falls into the gray area of copyrights. It may be illegal to distribute OS/2, but IBM is not enforcing copyright claims on it (if there is not an interesting amount of money involved).

2) We do not have a full updated installer of OS/2 anymore. If eCS disappears, it will be hard to get OS/2 install on real hardware.

So, between the alternatives we have:
Alternative - Create an OS/2 Warp 4.52 Distro.  eComStation is nothing more than Warp 4.52 with a lot of open source software on it, some other private software (installer) and a lot of effort to tweak it to make it work.

The same thing can be recreate to use something similar to UpdCD to create a new OS/2 distro from a OS/2 Warp 4.52 ISO image. Just like Sigurd is doing, the idea will be to have a open/public package that will bundle all OS/2 open source software, and with the use of a legally acquired license of OS/2 Warp 4.52 ISO you can generate your own Distro, which will be interesting to assign a name for it.

The issue with this alternative is that no new license of OS/2 can be sold. Legally it is only an alternative for people that already have a license of "OS/2 Warp 4.52".  But I think that this can be best way to deal if eCS disappear from the point of view of the community.  (Still no solution for corporate customers or people that require new licenses, but today they can still order eCS).

I want to be wrong about this, but I have no evidence that shows me that XEU/Mensys is making progress with eCS. Any other Non-Mensys/XEU solution alternatives ideas around?

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on December 30, 2014, 07:03:08 pm
Is it that important that the base operating system be 4.52? Probably a lot more copies of Warp V4 available then 4.52 and it can legally be upgraded to Ver 4.5. Though I guess the big problem is getting multiple cores working on V4.5
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on December 31, 2014, 05:31:34 pm
Yes, Warp 4 is more easy to find than version 4.5x, but it is just an idea.

The other crazy idea is to have an organization to buy a lot of 100 Warp 4 boxes (for example), and share that 100 licenses with a registered group of people for a year, since that 100 people will became part of the organization for a period of time... I don't know if the OS/2 license allows you to do that, but that is too crazy. 

It will like Netlabs, OS2VOICE, or OS2World (for example) buying OS/2 license boxes , storing them and giving one to each subscribers for a period of time, and during that period the person will be a "Registered member" of that organization. ... too crazy to work out? I need to read the license agreement again.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Greg Pringle on December 31, 2014, 07:27:39 pm
I notice the ecomstation.com web site has an "ORDER" button that has a link to "https://shop.xeu.com/"

These would of course be new licenses. Is the concern  that these will not be available?
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on December 31, 2014, 08:12:58 pm
Hi Greg

My concern is that there are no real progress with eComStation since Jan 1 of 2014 (http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php/topic,291.msg2928.html#msg2928). Suddenly XEU showed up as the owner of eComStation and haven't specified any plans with it.  Menso (Mensys owner) show up at Warpstock 2014 and said that they are still working, but nothing had been announced or showed from their side.  While some of the important drivers developers that used to be hired by Mensys started a new company. That is the source of my concern.

For sure, you can still order eComStation from their site and get licenses, but from the platform point of view, there haven't been progress with eComStation (not a single new release or formal announcement) since Jan of 2014. I think it is time for Mensys/XEU to show us something. But that is my personal opinion. 

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Eugene Tucker on January 01, 2015, 06:48:15 pm
I have just purchased a renewal and it processed properly. Foolish I know and a potential waste of money, but I wanted to see for myself. Details of status of the product should be communicated, but the way modern businesses conduct themselves today there is so much cloak and dagger.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Sigurd Fastenrath on January 07, 2015, 10:40:46 am
So, between the alternatives we have:
Alternative - Create an OS/2 Warp 4.52 Distro.

At least on paper this is the one and only chance to keep OS/2 going on. Until Mensys proves that black is white I see no more development or even things going on at Mensys, other than may be trying to satisfy/solve problems for customer they have and already purchased eCS. 

If I remember correctly there have been posts here around that at the beginning of Arca Noae there have been negotations with Mensys in wich way to cooperate. Then Arca Noae started (fortunately!) their business and it seems to me that these negotations had lead to nowhere. That might lead to the conclusion that ecomstation is dead.


In practice
creating an own distro is doomed to failure, due to the license issues.

The only hope I have in this case is that Arca Noae may get an license agreement with IBM - if Arca Noae is interested to do so at all. And if I remeber correctly I have read more than once that they are not going to do such things.

Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Lewis Rosenthal on January 07, 2015, 02:55:42 pm
Hi, guys...

Some quick points:
Our last exchange with XEU was last month, so this news is current as of the end of 2014. I would reiterate that Arca Noae's software and driver subscription complements XEU's software subscription, and current eCS licensees may indeed get value out of both subscriptions.

I'll have some news to announce if and when we finalize our discussion, but be assured those discussions are still ongoing.

Cheers
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Fahrvenugen on January 07, 2015, 04:44:53 pm
Hi,

I'd just point out, in addition to the fact that Lewis has already stated that Arca Noae isn't looking to do a full client - is that right now the only way to (easily) get V4.52 is via eCS or to have an IBM license already to which you paid IBM for (or to negotiate directly with IBM).  It isn't something you're able to find copies of on the used market.

Unlike V4 (which was released in a box / shrink-wrap version), IBM only released V4.52 as a part of Software Choice (and I believe also for a while it was in the Developer and educational software collections), for those who had paid IBM for a SWC subscription.  From what I recall (and someone feel free to correct me if I am incorrect) the SWC subscriptions were not transferable.  I think (and again, I'm going from memory here - it was a long time ago) the version of 4.52 which is part of eCS - technically is a different IBM part number then the SWC version  - even though the code is identical.  The part number licensed to Serenity / Mensys came with a licensing setup allowing for eCS to be developed / distributed by Serenity / Mensys.

As a result, my understanding is that it is okay to sell a boxed V4 copy used (ebay or where ever), just as I believe it is okay to sell a used copy of eCS (I could be incorrect on this part).  However I don't believe it is legal to sell a "used" copy of IBM OS/2 V4.52 due to the way SWC was set up / licensed.

Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Jan Waliszewski on January 07, 2015, 09:47:37 pm
Fahrvenugen described very precisely the legal position of OS/2 and ECS today (including Warp 4.52, which may be legally obtained only as a part of ECS and the one from SWC is indeed not tranferrable). The conclusion is that only cooperation of Arca Noae and Mensys/XEU allows progress of OS/2 / ECS maintenance in reasonably manner. It is the only scenario in which existing OS/2 / ECS users can be supported while allowing new users to buy licenses.

Greetings - Jan Waliszewski
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: ivan on January 08, 2015, 12:57:26 am
Jan, is there any vast improvement in 4.52 over Warp 4 with FP 6?  We have both, WSeB as well, because we got SWC when it first came out and kept everything up to date until they stopped supplying updates. 

Since OS/2 is still working, what are the specific updates to the base OS that eCS has provided?  I don't mean the addons just the base OS/2 - Has Mensys whatever got access to the source code for OS/2 and if so why are they not working on fixing several of the bugs?
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Fahrvenugen on January 08, 2015, 01:45:15 am
Ivan,

Warp 4 with FP 6 is even older.  The latest public fixpak for Warp 4 is FP15 and DDPak 2 (Device Driver fixpak).  There were additional FP's released for Warp 4 for those with  a SWC or other type of paid subscription.

Warp 4 + FP15 + DDPak 2 brings you up to Warp 4.50 (legally), but the non-CP version (the CP version was the SWC version / update, which essentially was a client version of WSeB - the base OS without the extra "server" stuff)

The big changes with the CP version of Warp 4 (what we know as 4.52) is the addition of LVM and JFS.  There were a number of other things (bug fixes, device driver updates, updated installer so it wouldn't crap out on AMD and then Intel 64-bit processors, etc).  It also came with the full 32 bit TCP/IP stack (although that can be added to Warp 4).

As for eCS, the big updates are a new installer, device drivers to make installation easier, with version 2 - bootable JFS, and additonal software to make the overall experience an easier one.

As far as I am aware, Mensys does not have direct access to OS/2 source code, other then code which IBM has themselves made available (such as code in the Device Driver  / Development Tools, etc).  Some code IBM has released to open source (JFS for example).  As a result bugs which require direct access to OS/2 source code to fix still go unfixed.  However things which can be fixed by hooking into existing code or replacing existing code with alternate code (such as device drivers, the work that has been done to get ACPI working, etc) - that's seen attention.

Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 08, 2015, 05:40:04 am
Hi Ivan, besides what Fahrvenugen says, there has also been newer fixpaks applied to the base code including newer kernels, eg eCS 2.2b2 comes with the 106 kernel which includes a fix for using high memory (a crash when closing apps) and I believe several other parts of the system were updated and in theory Mensys can pay IBM to fix other issues. In practice I don't think they have the cash to pay.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: ivan on January 08, 2015, 11:54:25 am
Sorry Guys, I should have said that FP 6 is for WSeB (it was the early hour in the morning after a very long day - at least that is my excuse).  We have CDs full of various updates, fixpaks, kernels etc - although I don't remember seeing the 14.106 kernel.

My main point was, and still is, is that there is little r no change to the base OS/2 that makes up eCS.  Agreed, a new improved installer would be nice but is not essential for us - we have basic disk images that we use when we change equipment, main boards, HDs etc.

As I see it there are some things that must happen before we can push OS/2 out to the world again.
1) There needs to be a name change eCS is meaningless to most people and OS/2 is the property of IBM.  Somewhere along the line some research needs to be undertaken to find a name that resonates with the public.
2) The price has to be one that people will want to buy it to try - make it too expensive and no one will look at it.  Just how much the price is still dictated by IBM I don't know.
3) It needs to install as easily as windows on most computers.  Yes, I know that will be a lot of work that needs to be undertaken on drivers, mainly video sound and network although the main board manufactures appear to be standardising on a small number of chips which may be an advantage (example, most of the boards we are look at as possible replacements are using the Realtek 8111 gigabit network chip).

There are other things but the above are the main ones and they will cost money to implement well - much more than our dwindling community can raise.  So the first thing might be to look for a commercial sponsor, someone like Elon Musk and SpaceX or Richard Branson and Virgin Atlantic.
     
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 08, 2015, 04:11:03 pm
Sorry, it had been a very busy days at work and it is getting worst, but I can not resist to jump into the discussion.

What is surprising to me is that many people still have faith in IBM, like if they are doing something on the back or to secretly private paying customers.

The fact is that  FP6 and Kernel 14.106 was released on 2007 (I think it dated 2007-Feb-16). From that day I haven't seen a single binary / Source code update from IBM on this platform.

Does anybody has other evidence of a single IBM binaries release since FP6? Please let me know to include it here (http://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/Updating_OS/2_Warp_4.52).

And I consider OS/2 Warp and Warp Server for e-business Abandonware - Please read wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware

"Abandonware is a product, typically software, ignored by its owner and manufacturer, and for which no product support is available. Although such software is usually still under copyright, the owner may not be tracking or enforcing copyright violations. Abandonware is one case of the general concept of orphan works."

OS/2 Warp and OS/2 Warp Server for e-business are abandonware since 2006 December 31 (http://www-01.ibm.com/software/support/lifecycleapp/PLCSearch.wss?q=OS%2F2&scope=&ibm-search.x=0&ibm-search.y=0&sort=P). You can not buy OS/2 Warp and OS/2 Warp Server for e-business, you can not get official support. It falls under the definition of abandonware, but that do not mean that distributing abandonware is legal. The issue with Abandonware is that everybody tends to make its own concept about it to their convenience.

Just in case you are getting confused, eComStation is not abandonware (yet), and it is not "OS/2 Warp and/or OS/2 Warp Server for e-business" it is a different product, even if it uses OS/2's components, that packaging make it a different brand product.

I don't know in how many years (when all of us will be dead) OS/2 will turn into Public Domain. At that day we will no longer discuss about abandonware :)

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Lewis Rosenthal on January 08, 2015, 04:42:52 pm
And I consider OS/2 Warp and Warp Server for e-business Abandonware - Please read wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abandonware

"Abandonware is a product, typically software, ignored by its owner and manufacturer, and for which no product support is available. Although such software is usually still under copyright, the owner may not be tracking or enforcing copyright violations. Abandonware is one case of the general concept of orphan works."

OS/2 Warp and OS/2 Warp Server for e-business are abandonware since 2006 December 31 (http://www-01.ibm.com/software/support/lifecycleapp/PLCSearch.wss?q=OS%2F2&scope=&ibm-search.x=0&ibm-search.y=0&sort=P). You can not buy OS/2 Warp and OS/2 Warp Server for e-business, you can not get official support. It falls under the definition of abandonware, but that do not mean that distributing abandonware is legal. The issue with Abandonware is that everybody tends to make its own concept about it to their convenience.

But IBM still does sell OS/2 to customers under contract and still sells support contracts (I know this for a fact). "Not actively marketed or updated" does not mean "abandoned." IBM (and others, including Microsoft) may still assert copyright claims over portions of the code, and while "Joe Hacker" may leave off working on his prized REXX script ten years later and forget about it, or XYZ Company may go out of business without selling its intellectual property, IBM and others are still around and do employ people to enforce copyright infringement.

Not speaking as an attorney, but having some experience in the US regarding copyright enforcement (and with a particular patent troll), I can tell you that proving damages is another matter. Considering the amount of money IBM gets for one of their support contracts, however, I would not want to be on the paying end of such a claim.

Risks are what they are. Big Blue probably would not even be aware of someone stealing its IP (on this scale). However, if a tech working at one of their customers decided to advise his superiors not to renew a maintenance contract because he could get the same operating system branded by someone else, including some level of support, such a non-renewal action might prompt people to sit up and take notice.

Thus, regardless Wikipedia's definition of abandonware, I would submit that IBM has not walked away from its copyrights and patents on various parts of OS/2.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 08, 2015, 04:52:35 pm
Hi Lewis.

I'm not saying that Arca Noae should do something or put yourself at risk, and I'm not saying that Abandonware is legal. I agree with you (or anybody) that you can get sue from IBM at anytime if you distribute OS/2 as abandonware (if it is financially attractive for IBM). I agreed that abandonware is a legal risk. For exmaple, at the moment I don't see Microsoft suing companies/individuals for Windows 3.1 and Microsoft Bob, but there is a risk it can happens if Microsoft sees a good amount of money.

But OS/2 is Abandonware according to the concept on Wikipedia, and I haven't see any new IBM OS/2 binary since 2006. If anybody has evidence of a new kernel, or any other binary, please let me know.

Regards. 
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Lewis Rosenthal on January 09, 2015, 03:48:39 am
Hi, Martin...

But OS/2 is Abandonware according to the concept on Wikipedia, and I haven't see any new IBM OS/2 binary since 2006. If anybody has evidence of a new kernel, or any other binary, please let me know.

Wikipedia also says at the very top of that article:
Quote
This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (June 2009)

The talk page is much more revealing concerning the differing points of view as to what actually qualifies as "abandonware." Thus, I don't accept the definition as set forth on the article page, so I would have to respectfully disagree with your characterization that OS/2 is abandonware. People of good conscience may disagree from time to time, and we're still friends.  :)

Your agreement with me concerning IBM or Microsoft asserting claim is reassuring. I do applaud your work on Github (much as I dislike Github itself, which is a topic for another conversation), collecting some great stuff which may prove useful to developers and packagers in the future, and which should be preserved somewhere. I'm glad, too, that you don't actually consider OS/2 abandonware in the sense that you haven't uploaded any OS/2 code to Github!  :D

As for any new binaries from IBM, it is entirely possible that some patched binaries were delivered to support customers since 2006. The fact that such binaries were not made available for distribution to the general public, or whether any such code was actually delivered does not negate my point that IBM still sells support contracts for OS/2, and thus, they haven't abandoned it altogether.

Similarly, just because Microsoft announced EOL for Windows XP, and indeed, that deadline has passed, including the end of public binary updates and fixes, doesn't mean that XP is abandonware, either. In fact, far from it. Microsoft - like IBM - is currently selling (very expensive) support contracts for XP:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/2047768/microsoft-will-still-patch-windows-xp-for-a-select-group.html
http://windowsitpro.com/windows-xp/what-expect-windows-xp-custom-support-agreement

So, my argument is "not generally available" and "no public fixes, feature enhancements, or updates" does not equal "abandoned."

Cheers
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 09, 2015, 02:55:13 pm
Quote
People of good conscience may disagree from time to time, and we're still friends.  :)
Sure, but I still disagreed :)

I understand that your point is that declaring OS/2 as abandonware is the same as telling people to go home and stop working on this platform, which is not what anybody on this community wants. But it does not mean that. Maybe the word "abandonware" is perceived as a bad thing, but that are only personal perceptions.   

Abandonware is just a concept, if it is good or bad is just a way to see it. If for political reasons you don't want to accept that OS/2 is abandonware it is ok. Wikipedia does not says "Abandonware = Waste of Time" or "Abandonware = Get out of it FAST", no at all.

To me it is abandonware, since IBM is not marketing it, is not selling it, special contracts for IBM support are very, very expensive and hard to get. And we may think that IBM had updated some binaries since 2006, but we don't have any evidence. Why if Serenity/Mensys/XEU has a OEM contract with IBM didn't packaged on eCS any of those supposedly updated binaries?

General Question: If we agree that OS/2 is abadonware will you drop the community?, my answer is no. (and also remember that eCS is not abandonware).

Lewis, I don't want to waste your time, you are doing a more important job and I don't want this discussion take away time from you. I think it is abandonware, you don't, that's is.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Greg Pringle on January 09, 2015, 05:07:44 pm
I find the discussion of abandoneware and copyrights amusing.

When I purchase a License from Xeu for eComstation then IBM and potentially Microsoft get a cut.

Seems if a product is still being sold it is an actual product.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 09, 2015, 05:46:41 pm
Hi Greg.

But you are not getting OS/2 (Brand) you are getting eComStaiton brand. 

I don't think that Microsoft is getting a cut on each eComStation license. I can not be sure about it, but from what I read on the "IBM/Microsoft Jointly Development Agreement (http://tech-insider.org/os2/research/acrobat/871126.pdf)" , there is IBM Code, MS Code and Jointly Code.  It seems to me that MS gave a royalty-free right to distribute his code, but that is only my reading and more information is missing, since some Annex (Phase II documents) can say a different thing.

I always wanted to discuss this document, and if there is someone with more IP experience that can comment on it, but sadly there is no much public interest to  understand the document.

Regards

Added Note: By the way, the document does not mention OS/2, but according to what it is being said this is the agreement that cover also OS/2, but there are missing the docs with the OS/2 specifics.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Andreas Schnellbacher on January 09, 2015, 06:32:59 pm
When I purchase a License from Xeu for eComstation then IBM [...]

Maybe - it depends on their contract.

[...] and potentially Microsoft get a cut.

Don't mix license and copyright up. IBM uses externally copyrighted code, but owns the license to sell code out of the Microsoft days, IIRC.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 09, 2015, 07:12:17 pm
As I remember, Microsoft was getting a cut for Winos2 before Warp V4 which is why there were red and blue box versions of OS/2 with different price points (redbox V3 was being sold at the drugstore for $50CDN at one point) and didn't have to pay royalties on Warp V4 and newer. They also got paid for HPFS386 which was part of the reason for JFS.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Eugene Tucker on January 09, 2015, 10:41:14 pm
Here is the text from an email from Joachim Benjamins...


Hi Eugene,

thanks for your interest. Best wishes for 2015 for you and your loved ones!

We probably will not release another beta but will go straight to eCS 2.2 GA. Currently this release is pending amongst others on negotiations with Arca Noae about inclusion of the required updates and drivers. When available we'll obviously share the news!

Best regards,
Joachim Benjamins
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Fahrvenugen on January 10, 2015, 10:16:04 pm
As I remember, Microsoft was getting a cut for Winos2 before Warp V4 which is why there were red and blue box versions of OS/2 with different price points (redbox V3 was being sold at the drugstore for $50CDN at one point) and didn't have to pay royalties on Warp V4 and newer. They also got paid for HPFS386 which was part of the reason for JFS.

Yup!  One of the Warp 3 (red) boxes that I have on the shelf still has the original price stickers on it - $49.95.  I actually found that copy in a bargin-bin in the end of 1996 when it was marked down to $14.99 not long after Warp 4 was released (seems the store wanted to purge the old product).  I'd mainly bought it to have an additional spare OS/2 license for V3.

Interestingly enough - a year later I set up a Warp 3 box for a customized task that just needed to work, and for that box I used that red-box license that I bought for $14.99.  Although all the hardware with the exception of the case has been replaced (new motherboard, hard drive, sound card, memory, power supply, etc), there is still a system running that same task on V3 with that same license.

As far as the abandonware discussion goes, I do not consider OS/2 to be abandonware, and I find there are a lot of difficulties and assumptions with the wikipedia definition.  I've got some industry-specific code that I wrote years ago and have not done updates for in years.  It still works and does exactly what it was designed to do.  I admit that I don't actively enforce copyright on it, however I continue to hold copyright on all my code.  Just because I have not done anything with my code in years does not mean I consider it to be abandoned - if someone came to me with additional requirements and a proposal that made sense to me, I'd consider the possibility of a change / update.



Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 11, 2015, 06:11:51 pm
It seems that in this case we can not define abandonware since nobody trust wikipedia :)

In that case these are the facts:
- There is no new version of OS/2 by IBM since 2002 when 4.52 was released.
- There are no new fixpacks since 2006. No binaries had been showed to exist prior that date.
- Individuals (Community members) can not acquired OS/2. They can only acquire the eCS brand.
- IBM discontinued all OS/2 part numbers. There are not OS/2 part numbers on their software offerings (Price lists).
- IBM give OS/2 support and new licenses to big corporate customers, which we don't know the name and haven't produce any updated binary since 2006. (There is no evidence of a newer binary).

Maybe it is a eCS sales pitch to make think people that IBM is behind eCS, but it is not. There haven't been any IBM updated binary since 2006, that is what the evidence told me. If somebody has see, and can share some screenshots, bldlevel of some IBM updated binary please let me know.

By the way, there is no need to label me as person that don't like eCS, I like it and use it, but there had been no progress in one year and very, very, very bad communication to the community.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 11, 2015, 06:13:54 pm
But I still think that we should have another alternative.

Plan B: Create an community OS/2 distro that requires original OS/2 ISO (or even from eCS) and license to be build.
Even that (as it had been said) it is doomed to fail, it can be a good first step to move forward on cloning other parts of the OS.

I still insist that the long term strategy should be try to clone the IBM components with open source alternatives. The first versions will suck and will have a lot of bugs, but we will have something that can be evolved, and not like close source software.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Fahrvenugen on January 11, 2015, 08:31:36 pm
But I still think that we should have another alternative.

Plan B: Create an community OS/2 distro that requires original OS/2 ISO (or even from eCS) and license to be build.


Forgive me if I am misunderstanding, but isn't that what UpdCD currently does?  I can take an IBM ISO for Warp 3, Warp 4, or eCS and run it through UpdCD - which will add in newer device drivers, fixpaks, community-built device drivers, additional software (both GPL and non-GPL but still freely available), and end up with an updated ISO that I can install containing the latest IBM provided code for that particular release plus the various community-based additions/updates that I chose to add.

I'm not sure how that differs from what you're suggesting.

Thanks
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Lewis Rosenthal on January 11, 2015, 09:03:27 pm
It seems that in this case we can not define abandonware since nobody trust wikipedia :)

 :)

Quote
In that case these are the facts:
- There is no new version of OS/2 by IBM since 2002 when 4.52 was released.

No new publicly-available version, no.

However, I've written things for clients which have never been released to the public (see more discussion of similar situations, above). That doesn't mean I've abandoned them or that I would want someone else to pick them up and start selling them as his (or her) own.

Quote
- There are no new fixpacks since 2006. No binaries had been showed to exist prior that date.

Again, it is entirely possible that IBM supplied fixpacks to/for specific customers, and did not make these available either to the general public or to Mensys. This doesn't mean that IBM abandoned the code (abandoning the "code" is different than abandoning the "project," BTW).

Quote
- Individuals (Community members) can not acquired OS/2. They can only acquire the eCS brand.

True.

Quote
- IBM discontinued all OS/2 part numbers. There are not OS/2 part numbers on their software offerings (Price lists).
- IBM give OS/2 support and new licenses to big corporate customers, which we don't know the name and haven't produce any updated binary since 2006. (There is no evidence of a newer binary).

No evidence, no.

Quote
Maybe it is a eCS sales pitch to make think people that IBM is behind eCS, but it is not. There haven't been any IBM updated binary since 2006, that is what the evidence told me. If somebody has see, and can share some screenshots, bldlevel of some IBM updated binary please let me know.

The OS/2 components in eCS are fully licensed by Mensys from IBM, to the best of my knowledge. I don't know that people think that IBM is "behind" eCS. Certainly, there is OS/2 code in eCS.

Quote
By the way, there is no need to label me as person that don't like eCS, I like it and use it, but there had been no progress in one year and very, very, very bad communication to the community.

I would never label you as such, Martin. You do a tremendous service for the Community, and I know you are an avid fan of the operating system and the philosophy behind it, and wish only for it to succeed.  :)

Quote
I still insist that the long term strategy should be try to clone the IBM components with open source alternatives. The first versions will suck and will have a lot of bugs, but we will have something that can be evolved, and not like close source software.

This was the goal of the Warpicity Proposal of Lynn Maxson:

http://www.scoug.com/pastpresentations.html
http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0699H/vnewsf2.htm
http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0699H/vnewsf3.htm

Interesting reading, particularly in today's context.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Doug Bissett on January 12, 2015, 02:24:26 am
I would remind you, that IBM employs some of the best lawyers on the planet. If IBM lost control of anything that they own, a number of them would be in BIG trouble. I am also pretty sure that Microsoft is in the same boat. On the other hand, IBM, doesn't bother with small indiscretions, that don't really cost them money (Microsoft may be a different matter, but it would still have to be worth their time and expense). I would not like to be the person who steps over the line. If nothing else, you would need a few million, just to pay your own lawyers.

OS/2 is still being sold to Serenity Systems (and possibly others), who have subcontracted Mensys to sell it for them. Therefore, OS/2 is far from "abandon ware", it is still a current product, even if it has not been updated "forever".

Quote
Quote

    I still insist that the long term strategy should be try to clone the IBM components with open source alternatives. The first versions will suck and will have a lot of bugs, but we will have something that can be evolved, and not like close source software.

This was the goal of the Warpicity Proposal of Lynn Maxson:

http://www.scoug.com/pastpresentations.html
http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0699H/vnewsf2.htm
http://www.os2voice.org/VNL/past_issues/VNL0699H/vnewsf3.htm

Interesting reading, particularly in today's context.

There have been a number of things that have been updated by Mensys, and now Arca Noae (among others). Some of it is based on IBM's work, and some is original. The idea has been around for a long time. Some of it has already happened, but only in small steps. As time goes on, there are fewer people who have the knowledge to even attempt the small steps.

Martin seems to want to clone the WPS, but there is no need to do that, because XWorkplace has already expanded the WPS capabilities, and shown the path to do more (if anybody really wants to tackle it). QSINIT has already made a new OS2LDR, that works well, and as a bonus, it provides a RAMDISK that uses memory above what OS/2 can normally address. That has also shown the way to use that memory for other things (if anybody wants to do it). The OS/4 project is working on a kernel replacement. Unfortunately, there are some legal questions about the way that is being done. Those questions need to be cleared up before OS/4 can be considered to be a replacement kernel. JFS has been changed from the IBM version to an open source version (also from IBM, I think). It has also been updated so that OS/2 can boot from it. There are other things either done, or in the works, to update the OS (including drivers) itself. Then, there are the porting projects, which supply a lot of new application software, and IBM has little to do with them. Unfortunately, there is very little new "native" development, which should be the backbone of any OS. One of the main "problems" is that everybody insists that new software needs to be "compatible" with software on other OSs. I look at a product like PMView (still being maintained), and I see something superior to what other OSs have (although PMView is available in a windows version).

It seems that the "dream" is under way, but if you want to kill OS/2, try to do too much with those who can do it. Small steps are the only way to do it, and those small steps need to be targeted at the most important parts (currently WiFi, and USB 3.0.IMO). User software (Firefox, Seamonkey, Thunderbird, OpenOffice, etc.) also need attention, because the OS needs software to be useful (although older software generally gets the job done). One of the BIG problems here, are the tools required to do the job. Many of them are stretched to the limit already.

The main problem today, is availability of knowledgeable programmers. There are far too few, and they are working way too hard to get some of this stuff done.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 12, 2015, 04:20:33 am
Quote
JFS has been changed from the IBM version to an open source version (also from IBM, I think). It has also been updated so that OS/2 can boot from it.

I just updated JFS, the license is definitely not open source and instead looks like a standard closed source license. If people and/or companies are taking GPL source and closing it to sell then it reflects really badly on the community. I was always under the impression that the updating work was done with the OS/2 branch of JFS rather then the Linux branch.
Unluckily with the GPL, it is an all or nothing thing.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 12, 2015, 05:19:40 pm
Quote
I would remind you, that IBM employs some of the best lawyers on the planet.
That kind of FUD only works for large companies that are pirating large volumes of OS/2 software (which it is not impossible but improbable). This is a community of OS/2 users and not OS/2 corporations. And I'm not implying that abandonware is legal, just that a "OS/2 Distro" can be created the same say that UpdCD did, or is it UpdCD illegal?

Quote
Martin seems to want to clone the WPS, but there is no need to do that, because XWorkplace has already expanded the WPS capabilities, and shown the path to do more (if anybody really wants to tackle it).

The issue with XWorkplace is that it is not a replacement of WPS, it is a extensions of the WPS classes that expands the functionality of WPS child objects. Which means that XWorkplace requires the close source proprietary WPS. That why I agreed and I will support anybody that will like to convert XWorkplace into a WPS replacement by not using the parent WPS classes, but by cloning them.

Quote
QSINIT has already made a new OS2LDR,...

That is a different things QSINIT is a OS2LDR from scratch which is good, even that the source code is public it is not open source. It says it is for "non-commercial use only" which is incompatible with open source. But this is a good project that maybe someday the author will put it under an open source license.

Quote
The main problem today, is availability of knowledgeable programmers.
Only programmers, knowledge can be acquired. I don't like treating "people with knowledge" as superior, I prefer people with good attitude more than "rocks stars programmers".

Quote
It seems that the "dream" is under way, but if you want to kill OS/2, try to do too much with those who can do it.
????? - A software can be killed?, if so OS/2 and all its brand was killed by its owner, IBM.  I don't want to kill it, I want to clone it. The utopian goal is to free it from IBM and from single vendors that comes and goes.

Doug, this is the old discussion "don't fix what it is not broken". I don't agreed with that, the stuff that is working is close source, and it is what is limiting the grow of the platform. Doug, we already discuss it, you need drivers (me too) but you think that the future for the platform is drivers, I just disagree on that. I think that a future for the platform is making it open source.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 12, 2015, 06:21:01 pm
Quote
JFS has been changed from the IBM version to an open source version (also from IBM, I think). It has also been updated so that OS/2 can boot from it.

I just updated JFS, the license is definitely not open source and instead looks like a standard closed source license. If people and/or companies are taking GPL source and closing it to sell then it reflects really badly on the community. I was always under the impression that the updating work was done with the OS/2 branch of JFS rather then the Linux branch.
Unluckily with the GPL, it is an all or nothing thing.

Hi Dave, Which JFS are you modifying? Where did you get the source code?

The one IBM released to the public is GNU GPL, but if you have it from other IBM source that can change. I really want to see if OS/2's JFS can be open sourced. I know that IBM only released the AIX/Linux version as open source, but I never knew if that applies for OS/2.

I know that withe GPL is all or nothing, and sometimes developers have a hard time to integrate it because at the end we just want stuff working. But I always see it that way, if I accept there is close source license software that is being sold and you are forced not to change it, or share the source code and binaries it.... I must  accept its complete license opposite, software that you can share, but forces you the share the source     ....so everybody has it's space :)
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 12, 2015, 06:36:52 pm
It's the latest JFS from Arca Noae, I'm not modifying it, just updating the system. No source that I know of though I believe some is hosted on netlabs.
When IBM rewrote JFS for OS/2 (and eventually AIX) they forked it into a propriety OS/2 and AIX version and a GPL version. I doubt the OS/2 version will ever be open sourced but the GPL version could be ported and someone did start some years back with http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/download/pub/os2/system/drivers/filesys/freejfs_1_1.zip (http://hobbes.nmsu.edu/download/pub/os2/system/drivers/filesys/freejfs_1_1.zip). The 2 forks are somewhat compatible but there are differences.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Doug Bissett on January 12, 2015, 07:45:07 pm
Quote
This is a community of OS/2 users and not OS/2 corporations.

I don't know about where you live, but here, the law applies equally to individuals and large corporations. The only thing that saves people from prosecution is that it just isn't worth IBM's time, and expense, to do it.

Quote
just that a "OS/2 Distro" can be created the same say that UpdCD did, or is it UpdCD illegal?

UpdCD is legal, since it is designed to take a legal copy of OS/2, and create an updated CD. That updated CD is NOT legal, without the original legal CD to go along with it.

If you want to make a new OS/2 Distro, you need to do it in three parts. One, you need the "customer" to have a legal copy of OS/2 (available new, only through IBM, and their agents Serenity systems, who have sub contracted Mensys to handle the transactions). I am not even sure that it is legal to transfer the license from one user to another, but that seems to be ignored by IBM (and the users). Two, you need to have all of the updated parts of OS/2, to replace whatever needs to be updated. Three, you need to add whatever is required that has been created independently of what IBM (or Microsoft) did. Of course, all of that needs to be appropriately licensed.

FWIW, I don't see why it couldn't be done, but somebody will need to do a LOT of work. Give it a shot, and see how you make out. Oh yeah, start with consulting a lawyer, to see what you can, and cannot, do.

Quote
The issue with XWorkplace is that it is not a replacement of WPS, it is a extensions of the WPS classes that expands the functionality of WPS child objects. Which means that XWorkplace requires the close source proprietary WPS. That why I agreed and I will support anybody that will like to convert XWorkplace into a WPS replacement by not using the parent WPS classes, but by cloning them.

I agree that in an ideal world, you could clone the WPS. In the real world you haven't got any hope that it will ever happen. There just aren't enough people to do it, unless somebody wins a BIG lottery, and donates a good chunk of it to the cause. So far, that hasn't happened, and even if it does, there are a LOT of other things that need to be done first. It would probably be a 5 year project (even if IBM decided to do it), anyway.

Quote
That is a different things QSINIT is a OS2LDR from scratch which is good, even that the source code is public it is not open source. It says it is for "non-commercial use only" which is incompatible with open source. But this is a good project that maybe someday the author will put it under an open source license.

It is open source. Anybody can get the source. Whether they can make any sense out of it is another matter. The "non-commercial use only" is a bit of a puzzle. I am not sure what that really means. Does it mean that no commercial, entity (Ford, GM) can use it? or does it mean that Mensys cannot include it in eCS? I note that it does not mean that governments, charitable organizations, etc. cannot use it. In any case, it is a stupid restriction, and I am pretty sure that it was included because the author doesn't understand how to make a license, and that is probably because he doesn't fully understand English. In any case, he really should adopt one of the official licenses, because it is quite likely that what he is using would be found to be invalid by most courts. All I can say about that, is that it is better than nothing.

Quote
????? - A software can be killed?, if so OS/2 and all its brand was killed by its owner, IBM.  I don't want to kill it, I want to clone it. The utopian goal is to free it from IBM and from single vendors that comes and goes.

Yes, software can be killed. Sometimes it takes a while, but it can be killed. Some outstanding examples are well known in OS/2 circles. Most of them are the result of not having open source (GENMAC, SIO), but others just get neglected because they become obsolete (doesn't mean that they don't keep on working). If you do manage to get enough developers interested in cloning the WPS, you would first of all, need every one of the people who know something about the WPS. All of them would then need to spend most (if not all) of their time working on that one project, ignoring the other, more important, things like drivers, which are required to keep the OS viable in the short term. After about 5 years of development (I am being very optimistic), the first version of a clone might be available, but by then there would be very few people who haven't moved on (OS/2 cannot survive without updated drivers). Those who do stay with OS/2 will likely be running it on a Virtual Machine, and then it will likely only be one, or two, applications. Other applications, like machine control, don't use the WPS anyway. Why would anybody even care if the WPS has been cloned, but the OS would be effectively "dead".

Quote
you think that the future for the platform is drivers, I just disagree on that. I think that a future for the platform is making it open source.

Drivers can be done. Open sourcing the WPS cannot be done. Face the facts, OS/2 has a limited life span. If you take away drivers (and that would be necessary to get enough people to even start thinking about what needs to be done to clone the WPS), you no longer have a base to run the new WPS on. It would be necessary to convert it to some sort of Linux thing (which may not be all bad, but...), and that would be counter productive.  I still believe that in 5 years, the desktop computer, and laptops, as we know them, will be in the history books. OS/2 is not suited to what is currently replacing those things, and the WPS would need further modifications, that would make it unrecognizable. To do that, would require a LOT more people than the OS/2 platform has available, and it should have started about 10 years ago.

If you really think that you want to clone the WPS, the first step is to document everything that it does. Even that will take a long time, and I would bet that you can't do it, because no one person (or even 100 users) will know all of the features, and capabilities. You may come up with a reasonable sub set, that most people know about, but some of it will remain unknown, simply because parts of it don't get used enough for somebody to remember to  include it in the list.

Other things, like XCOPY desperately need some work, and they are much easier to clone. Start small, and work up to the bigger things as you learn more about it. You start by documenting what it does, then you document what it should do, then you find somebody to write the code, then you get that code tested by a small group of testers, then you get it tested by a larger group of testers, then you release a beta, then you release a GA. Then, you start over because it doesn't work as advertized, or the requirements have changed. Simple, for those who don't have to do it.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Fahrvenugen on January 12, 2015, 09:01:23 pm
I just updated JFS, the license is definitely not open source and instead looks like a standard closed source license. If people and/or companies are taking GPL source and closing it to sell then it reflects really badly on the community. I was always under the impression that the updating work was done with the OS/2 branch of JFS rather then the Linux branch.
Unluckily with the GPL, it is an all or nothing thing.

Hi,

Actually what came out in evidence at the SCO versus IBM trial is that the open source / GPL version of JFS which IBM released was the OS/2 version from WSeB minus the OS/2 stuff. (for those who didn't follow the SCO vs IBM trial, at one point SCO tried to claim that IBM had improperly open sourced the AIX JFS code, to which IBM was able to prove that it used its own code developed for WSeB)

http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20090406235022736



Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 12, 2015, 10:28:41 pm
The evidence was wrong. JFS 0.0.1 included the reference source which is full of OS2isms (actually it looks like plain old OS/2 code that should compile with Visual Age ), things like jfs_os2.h and randomly looking, in fs/jfs/ref/jfs_ea.c code like
Code: [Select]
#define INCL_DOSERRORS
#define INCL_NOPMAPI
#define INCL_DOSPROCESS

#define _cdecl __cdecl

#include <os2.h>

I found the source at http://ftp.cc.uoc.gr/system/jfs-0.0.1.tar.gz (http://ftp.cc.uoc.gr/system/jfs-0.0.1.tar.gz)
I also have a vague memory about the LVM code also being open sourced but have never seen it.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Fahrvenugen on January 13, 2015, 04:54:18 am
The evidence was wrong. JFS 0.0.1 included the reference source which is full of OS2isms (actually it looks like plain old OS/2 code that should compile with Visual Age ), things like jfs_os2.h and randomly looking, in fs/jfs/ref/jfs_ea.c code like
Code: [Select]
#define INCL_DOSERRORS
#define INCL_NOPMAPI
#define INCL_DOSPROCESS

#define _cdecl __cdecl

#include <os2.h>

I found the source at http://ftp.cc.uoc.gr/system/jfs-0.0.1.tar.gz (http://ftp.cc.uoc.gr/system/jfs-0.0.1.tar.gz)
I also have a vague memory about the LVM code also being open sourced but have never seen it.

Okay, I am corrected, it is entirely possible that I am incorrect about the part of them removing OS/2 code.  However it was entered into evidence that it was the OS/2 version of JFS that was open-sourced for Linux.  There was no evidence presented to contradict this (and SCO was looking for such evidence).  I admit that I have not looked at the GPL'd JFS code, but based on the above, it does appear that this was in fact the OS/2 version that was ported to Linux.

Anyways, within the realm of this discussion, JFS is one of those components of OS/2 which has been open sourced and thus could be used within any OS it gets ported to.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 13, 2015, 02:29:51 pm
I don't know about where you live, but here, the law applies equally to individuals and large corporations. The only thing that saves people from prosecution is that it just isn't worth IBM's time, and expense, to do it.

Hi Doug, I also do not know where you live or your interests on this platform. I didn't said that Abandonware is legal, the discussion started because people don't want to accept OS/2 is abandonware, or don't share the definition of abandonware.

What I said is that it will be legal to create a OS/2 Distro that uses an already pre-owned OS/2 ISO and license, it may be a good solution for us (people that have OS/2 licenses), but it can no be possible to expand the community since new licenses can not be generated. Also, the idea is not to distribuited the produced CD/ISO, the idea is to distribuite the installer for each guy with its OS/2 license and CD generate them by themself (like UpdCD does).

Why are your default thinking of the idea is "Copyright violation"? Why is that your first thought? Why are you trying to discredit an idea that don't even exist yet?
I don't want to start the "I see pirates everywhere" paranoid.  :D

Quote
OS/2 has a limited life span.
Your position is resignation, I just want to fight it a little bit, thats all. We already discussed this, I know that you don't see a future for the platform, you told me that before.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Sigurd Fastenrath on January 13, 2015, 03:00:11 pm
Imho I would like to add some ideas about how to make a "new" OS/2 Distro based on Warp 4.52. I do not want to take part in the discussion if it is legal or not or what can be cloned or not. Btw my tendencie is more towards Dougs opinion as I would like to have an OS/2 clone but it seems to me not realistic to ever get one. I am allways suprised to see the "old horse" still  running on modern hardware  8) - and I will try this as long as possible.

UPDCD is really a great piece of software. Once you have arranged everything and put everything in order you can create a bootable OS/2 DVD with almost all modern enhancements if you like. (I reported about it several times).
The one and only main (there are other but not that important) difference in the end between "my" OS/2 DVD and the eCS beta 2.2 is that I do not have ACPI right from the first boot process. I think one could figure this out, but I do not have the time nor the programming knowledge for this.

And in addition: I switched to - in my opinion - a much easier, shorter and better way - creating an universal clone (as I mentionend several times before as well).

The work with this clone has to be done only once, and I have done it for me. Sure, I am updating the clone from time to time.

Besides the 14.106SMP Kernel there are no files from eComstation. It is the Warp 4.52 with all the latest drivers (ACPI,AHCI,USB,JFS,Multimac,Panorama, SNAP,UNIAUD,HPFS386,FAT32,NTFS...), fixpacs, programs (JAVA;QT;Virtualbox;OpenOffice,Firefox,Thunderbird,Seamonkey), enhancements (QSINIT Loader, SAMBA, Finger+Stylus Support,CUPS), emulators (Virtualbox, VirtualPC,ScummVM,Dosbox including Winddows 3.11), tools (INITOR,XWP,DFSEE,AIRBOOTMANAGER,YUM-RPM...) - and in addition - all the Orignial OS/2 Warp 4 Programs (Voicetype,Bonuspak,Tutorial,Warpguides,Netwaresupport....) ....
- alltogether a 2.2GB file where a 8GB Partition is stored in.

The combination:

- DFSEE
- AirBootMananger
- Clone

gives me the opportunity to install this OS/2 Warp 4.52 clone on almost any hardware I do have right now, up to the Sony Vaio Pro 13 Haswell. In addition with the opportunity to have Windows 7 or 8/8.1 alongside...

This cloning succeeds where DVDs at least allways failed. I would have never had a working OS/2 on the Samsung Serie 7 Slate nor the Sony Vaio Pro 13. And it takes much less time.

The attached picture may give some impressions about what my clone and the touch enhancments do look like.

(http://Standard.jpg)

(http://12012015a.jpg)

(http://12012015b.jpg)



Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 13, 2015, 06:26:16 pm
Fahrvenugen , Dave.

I really will like that JFS (with all the JFS boot options) on OS/2 became open source.

The issue seems that if JFS-OS2 code was provided by IBM under the DDK license, it is doomed to be close source software (http://www.os2world.com/wiki/index.php/IBM_OS/2_Products_Licensing_Analysis#IBM_Device_Driver_Kit_-_2004).

If IBM released JFS-OS2 under other license to Mensys/others and later JFS-Linux under GNU GPL, the two source code can not be mixed or merged. (without IBM permission)

I will like to find the source of the JFS-OS2 source code (how it was shared outside IBM) and under which conditions was distributed, since I think that JFS was not included on IBM DDK 2004. Maybe there was a newer release that I'm missing.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Dave Yeo on January 13, 2015, 09:52:47 pm
I'm not sure what license our JFS branch was released under besides it being propriety. Quoting http://trac.netlabs.org/jfs/wiki (http://trac.netlabs.org/jfs/wiki)
Quote
The license on this source code for this project requires that it remain closed. Contrary to some misinformed opinions regarding the code for this project, it is not and never was GPL.
Which would mean that the developers never used or looked at the GPL code contrary to rumour.
Anyways I've uploaded the GPL branch to the os2world git repository, https://github.com/OS2World/JFS-GPL (https://github.com/OS2World/JFS-GPL). In theory it should build but of course is old and probably buggy.
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 13, 2015, 10:14:22 pm
Quote
The license on this source code for this project requires that it remain closed. Contrary to some misinformed opinions regarding the code for this project, it is not and never was GPL.

It is ok for David to specify that to do not have confusion. But they still do not tell where did they get the source code for this. Was all original work created by eCo Software, Pasha, Steven and David? Why it can not be open sourced? Is it based on IBM private source code? Is it the "evil" DDK license?

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Martin Iturbide on January 14, 2015, 04:13:52 pm
Hi Sigurd

I really think that you should share your UpdCD configuration files to the public, removing all IBM fixpack files and any other copyright, non- freeware files. Maybe you had been trolled on the past for trying to do this and that is why you preferred to do it privately, but I think it is a good idea.

Regards
Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: Sigurd Fastenrath on January 15, 2015, 10:03:38 am
Hi Sigurd

I really think that you should share your UpdCD configuration files to the public, removing all IBM fixpack files and any other copyright, non- freeware files. Maybe you had been trolled on the past for trying to do this and that is why you preferred to do it privately, but I think it is a good idea.

Regards

Hi Martin,

I think I will never share my UPDCD configuration nor my "Clones" - not even the "Universal clone". Fortunately I have not been trolled in the past because of this (or I missed or missunderstood it) and even if so - I do not care  ;)

The reasons for not sharing are:

- I invested to much time in this
- I do not want to have a lot of questions/problems because my version will not run or fit for others (as it for sure will, so problems are at hand)
- I already published so many hints and how to's to do it on your own, if one want's to (i.e. here http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php/topic,335.0.html (http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php/topic,335.0.html))

Even if I tried to build (and somehow succeeded) a new OS/2 Warp 4.52 DVD I still think it is the wrong path. DVDs are outdated.

I suggest to produce a bootable USB stick, containing DFSEE, a universal clone, and some special files needed for special hardware (Stylus+Finger support i.e.).
During the OS/2 User Meeting 2013 someone already showed a bootable OS/2 Merlin USB Stick with a working File Commander....

But who know's where the journey will lead to - Arca Noae and Bitwise are giving a strong hope to get and have drivers and applications for future use - but Mensys does show the opposite round with trying to get at least something out the door.

Once you have a license, start with the cloning method plus the support of Arca Noae, Bitwise, Paul Smedley, Wim Brul and all the others here around the community (sorry for not naming all) - there is simply no need anymore for a new Mensys Distro.

Title: Re: No word from Mensys/XEU - Alternatives?
Post by: walking_x on January 15, 2015, 01:15:46 pm
I suggest to produce a bootable USB stick, containing DFSEE, a universal clone, and some special files needed for special hardware (Stylus+Finger support i.e.).
You can use QSINIT`s ram drive for it, as one of variants ;)
I.e. it supports boot from own PAE ram disk.
There are two problems here: it is FAT only and unique drive letter selection.

Method is simple - QSINIT must be installed to USB stick (no matter - partitionized or big floppy, visible in OS/2 or not) in company with ZIPped OS/2 (small installation to fit on memory disk on PCs with low amount of memory (1-2Gb)).
BIOS starts QSINIT from USB stick, then OS/2 can be unzipped to ram disk (by internal QSINIT unzip) and boot process will switched to ram disk as "boot device". More details at the end of PAEDISK.TXT in archive.

It works, but with disadvantages: installation must be small, FAT only and without EA. But, as a bonus - the same installation without changes can be used for diskless PXE boot.