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 - Andreas Kohl

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 19
106
Polls / Re: Compatibility with OS/2
« on: November 22, 2017, 12:06:25 am »

I didn't know they existed.

UPDATE:  Volume I, Volume II, Volume III, Volume IV.

Those books were always available for free download at the IBM redbooks site.
Unfortunately the words "always" and "free" made the above statement wrong or at least inaccurate. You couldn't download any of the earlier mentioned files at all 20 years ago - a verifiable fact.

Quote
I don't think that there is something illegal on using those books are references.
Of course there's nothing illegal. But their content cannot serve as a reference (for what?). They deal with practical topics based on OS/2 Warp 3 - workbooks or training guides would fit better - and handbook is the right term used by ITSO. To cover later system or kernel enhancements it's quite easy to follow publications that refer to these books by using your BookManager READ/2 program's search function.

107
Polls / Re: Compatibility with OS/2
« on: November 20, 2017, 10:56:21 pm »
I was thinking on the way in to work today...  I don't think I'll be able to maintain full binary compatibility with existing OS/2 software, UNLESS I am able to contact IBM and work out some kind of licensing agreement which allows me to use binary techniques to try to decompile and investigate the inner-workings of various aspects of their kernel, and some of the drivers.
Why you're not reading the "The OS/2 Debugging Handbook". The four volumes should be available in BookMaster or portable document format if you don't want to order the printed edition.

I'm not a laywer so I cannot speech here about legal issues.

108
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 20, 2017, 08:39:25 pm »
I don't know what's going on here? UNIX' directory structure was adopted back in the days of DOS version 2.

You're smarter than that and know what I mean, without having to require users to always be technically accurate. This is not an Unix forum, while perhaps appriciating a more accurate report of both Unix and the history of MS-DOS. If I want an Unix directory structure with an own root, including but not limited to solutions like RPM, then I'll start using Unix. I won't.
Every OS/2 system has an "Unix directory structure" even when IPLed from floppy or network. And for sure every user who's posting here from an OS/2 (or NT) networked station is also using a BSD-derived IP stack. It's not a good idea to mix different topics namely directory structure, file system and UNIX. Only a simple example/question for porting trivial stuff: How about a shell script that handles "compress"ed UNIX files *.Z and also "pack"ed UNIX files *.z?

Quote
I could have installed such a (full) structure while smiling and not noticing it, while installing eCS 2.x DE/EN or AOS EN. But DE nor EN still isn't the prefered foreign language of the OS over here, and the developers of eCs 2.x and/or couldn't be arsed to produce an official directory structure-related upgrade for OS/2 and eCS. Different products, smaller user base. Most of the non-DE/EN community of IBM's has already left us, often without telling us.
For economical reasons only German counts for large remaining OS/2 deployments. There were two groups of people in the U.S. forced to learn German: DEA's dog handlers and IBM's OS/2 kernel developers.  ;)

Quote
Thanks for explsainig what Mensys did, but it's quite obvious that resources are limited. The reduced number of eCS 1.x and 2.x languages, compared to Warp 4 FixPaxk 0, has reduced the size of the community too.
Warp 4 fixpak 0 (XR_M000) was only available in American language AFAIK. No convincing argument.

Quote
That's nothing but a fact. Of life. I'm not demanding all files in one directory, but I'm often pointing out that such a change can, and should be avoided. FF45 is just an example of an important product "we" aren't using anymore, and so is an updated silly Qt-based game or most of the un-OS/2'ified GCC port. If I want most of Unix, then I'll start using Unix.
It's not fair to blame Unix for the chaotic YUM/RPM situation under OS/2-based systems. The current partly ported RPM features (from an quite outdated release) unfortunately leads to misconceptions in this area. Unix is about small tools that make a great environment. The GNUish bloatware around is not UNIX. To make it clear I don't want to blame FSF here. And so-called open source software existed even before. There are quite good examples for portable software. But also wrong assumptions which will cause trouble under OS/2 targets sometimes torturing end-users with wrong documentation, non-working national language support or other issues. It's a effortless regurgitation to write bug reports for recurrent disturbances.

I welcome every cooperative approach to extend the coexistence of portable software. Unfortunately some people spreading rumours here seem to have their own economic interests. That's not a bad thing at all ...but there's also a category marketplace in this fora most suiteable for mountebanks.

109
General Discussion / Re: ES/1 open source kernel
« on: November 20, 2017, 01:01:16 pm »
I will not judge about the expedience of using C++ in your approach. But I can give the "wise" advise: better using C. Everything else can be called a lèse-majesté.

110
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 20, 2017, 12:36:38 pm »
Or, less abstract and closer to home, by things like the assumption that OS/2 has a beloved Unix directory structure.
I don't know what's going on here? UNIX' directory structure was adopted back in the days of DOS version 2. And OS/2 remains quite compatible. Of course each has it's own limitations.

Quote
I've stopped updating several app because the old version is aimed at OS/2, while improved newer versions are aimed at the developer's eCS 2.x and AOS.
So which features you're missing?

This thread became really weird. So if there's a moderator: Please branch it out to a new thread! It has no relation with the original topic anymore. If Roderik wants to warm up old soup then I'm starting to believe in tragedies. Otčenáš

111
General Discussion / Re: ES/1 open source kernel
« on: November 20, 2017, 12:18:26 pm »
If you're keen on some publicity or a wider audience why not simply setting up a demo image with Jeff's PCjs. Just my two cents...

Et ne nos inducas in tentationem.

112
General Discussion / Re: ES/1 open source kernel
« on: November 18, 2017, 10:01:10 pm »
So how it runs inside a VDM?

I was able to verify it runs in dosbox 0.74 for Windows.  I haven't been able to figure out how to get it to use larger than an 80x25 text screen in dosbox, however, so it's limited.  VESA reports no extended 132xYY text modes, so it may not be possible.  The things I've been designing have been for my personal use and use 132x60 video modes.  I'm working on posting some screen shots right now.
DOSbox is a special case. It doesn't offer accurate emulation of an IBM PC compatible architecture. Fortunately even under Microsoft's OS/2 derived products there is a broader choice of emulation methods. Virtual PC or Virtual Server can do the trick for a limited set of modes. VirtualBox or QEMU use the Bochs Video BIOS. And PCem https://pcem-emulator.co.uk/status.html offers support for different graphic adapters.

113
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 18, 2017, 05:30:12 pm »
The IBM debuggers mostly work fine for GCC(g++) code including Mozilla. Steven did work getting the OpenWatcom linker linking the huge debug version of xul.
I suppose that IBM's HLL symbol format is utilised. That's of course a weak point in the Watcom debugger. So in a real world scenario I have to use a remote debugger under Windows NT or AIX.

Quote
Firefox itself has tools for debugging JavaScript and such. Profiling with GCC was discussed years back in the newsgroup but I forget the particulars.
That was back in the times when IWB changed to be built with GCC - not sure.

Quote
The newsgroup seems pretty dead.
But is the only source of valuable information that still remains.

To support the sponsorship I collected today some money from the street - not bad for 25 minutes...

114
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 18, 2017, 02:23:48 am »
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.
That's a big misconception. I simply dislike your sophistic behaviour here.

Quote
But when I asked him to ask questions and he does not.
Stop - there has never been a conversation about your "campaign" between us. Absolutely nothing!

Quote
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.
You can call it a "minority report". I will use in future comma instead of minus symbols in my posts. Perhaps they will look friendlier then ;-)

Quote
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.
Please no fallback to fake news again, the only new software for OS/2 that came up in the last half year were some device drivers that use a different toolset. It's nice to have GCC (g++) but I cannot find the GNU debugger (gdb)? Which debugger is used for current Mozilla development? Which profilers and code analysers are utilised? Questions, questions that will stay unanswered. The unclear current situation without any plan (as Sigurd mentioned) leads to unsatisfied users etc.

It would be a better idea to discuss about the technical details in the mozilla OS/2 newsgroup and not here.

And some extra ++++++

115
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 18, 2017, 01:39:37 am »
It would be good to continue on to Firefox 52ESR, which should be doable. 52ESR is going to be the last Mozilla release for XP and may be maintained for longer or forked for XP (and Vista) users.
Finally some correct information in this thread. The matching link for non-believers.

Quote
SeaMonkey is likely to die after 52ESR and is currently based on 52ESR with the next few versions planned to stay on 52ESR and there is a good chance that Mozilla52ESR will be forked to enable SeaMonkey to keep working with security fixes, there's rumours that some Linux dists are planning on maintaining it, which would include Firefox. Considering that we're always a year behind, we may be able to use the 52ESR code base for a few years
There's no final decision until now.

Quote
In summary, there is no great rush to move away from Mozilla and 52ESR may be viable for 3 or 4 years, by which time most browsers are probably going to be 64bit or in the case of QT based webkit, just as out of date as 52ESR. Chromium has the same problems as Mozilla with too fast of an update cycle.
Which I have to agree with.

Quote
All the other forks of Firefox I've looked at have been 64bit or dependent on working 3D graphics support.
The only working approach to ship a Mozilla-forked web browser for oldschool systems is Cameron's TenFourFox http://tenfourfox.blogspot.de/.  So the web browsing experience on a 17 years old G4 is better than on more recent Intel-based hardware under OS/2 nowadays.

116
Internet / Re: Lightning (SM/TB)
« on: November 17, 2017, 02:17:13 pm »
Same here, but it was unclear why a localized 4.7.x could be better, what you did to localize it, and so on, preferably without having to install and uninstall an EN/US/DE 4.7.x first.
It's quite easy different versions of Sm/Tb require specific versions of it's extensions. Lightning or calendar is a special case which was originally integrated then spun off became integrated again (contained extension) and now in the latest (2.49.1) is no longer contained. But Lightning 5.4b4 can be installed later via xpi on supported platforms. Sounds weird, but I cannot change it.

Quote
SM 2.42 claims to have some integrated Lightning, and apparently upgrading to 4.7.x is not the most valuable solution. I was hoping for some answers and details in the German text, that's all.
Seamonkey 2.42 was never released. It's a makeshift - thanks to Dave for his efforts. For specific questions a would refer to the earlier threads here or better the newsgroup.

117
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 17, 2017, 01:41:52 pm »
At least we have one "current" compiler for native OS/2: Peter's Iron Spring PL/I compiler. And how about the sleeping beauty of OpenWatcom C/C++?

</silence>
And Free Pascal (targets "OS/2 / eComStation" too), recently updated in 2017.
<silence>
Last time I checked it targeted EMX (which means OS/2 2.x or DOS extender) with all bells and whistles. Existing EMX-based applications are easy prey - but on YUM-infected systems also an endangered species.

118
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 17, 2017, 02:22:00 am »
Our GCC is a fork, forked back in the early 2.x days I believe, possibly due to RMS not wanting anything to do with proprietary systems such as OS/2.
It's more complicated to expain it here.

Quote
IBM paid for the development of GCC 3.2.2-3.3.5 to replace VACPP rather then develop VACPP anymore, so it is our official compiler I guess.
A vicious circle. I'm only aware that it was used for the later builds of the IBM WebBrowser for OS/2. IBM C/C++ Compiler V3.6.5 was used for this task before. VisualAge C++ remained but lost it's OS/2 host and target support. They also shipped also a Version for Linux (PPC) that performed much better than Apple's GCC under MacOS X on a PowerMac. But in real world AD mostly IBM XL C for AIX was used. Now they call almost all compiler products XL C/C++ for the different platforms.

At least we have one "current" compiler for native OS/2: Peter's Iron Spring PL/I compiler. And how about the sleeping beauty of OpenWatcom C/C++?

119
Article Discussions / Re: Sponsorship needed for new OS/2 web browser
« on: November 17, 2017, 01:26:53 am »
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.
Only three errors in one sentence.
1. The current "supported" versions of the GNU Compiler Collection (GCC) are Version 6.4 and 7.2. Neither full builds nor builds of a subset are currently available.
2. The mentioned download package comes not from his website but from dropbox - I didn't know that Paul is the owner of dropbox?
3. The mentioned download package is not a full package but a subset of GCC features (C and C++ frontend, gfortran frontend) - some tools but no standard C library or standard C++ library support included

Quote
I you reference that LIBCM not being updated that is a DLL. So why does not need to be updated ?
Sorry, it's totally incomprehensibly written. LIBCM is the multithreaded and LIBCS the singlethreaded module that implements C runtime library support under OS/2. I know the terminology is not fully correct.

Quote
We have plenty of new DLL's coming out that are in the Netlabs RPM repo that are being updated to support new ports.
Shared libraries (from a UNIX-like world) are quite different from "real" OS/2 DLLs. Everybody should use this bloatware really? Thanks for gossip and slander...

120
Internet / Re: Lightning (SM/TB)
« on: November 17, 2017, 12:37:15 am »
In the German forum I only posted the download links which will you direct back to OS/2 World's forum. Here it was message #13196 of  the thread (http://www.os2world.com/forum/index.php/topic,1374#msg13196) started by Dave.
Ah, your are right, that's probably the thread. But from far behind in my head I remember that you also posted a newer version (4.7.9 ??).

But because you wrote "notdürftig zusammengeschustert" I don't know if it has any advantages about 4.7.8.
The 4.7.8 was a multi volume zip archive that was probably too complicated to handle for some users of broken unzip frontends, although I invested some effort in testing - especially for distribution in a CID environment. The next one didn't underwent this procedure. On rare occasions I use Seamonkey 2.35 (but not the latest) with Lightning 4.0.x that proved to be the most valuable solution available under OS/2 nowadays. As more GNU bloatware became introduced to the builds reliability and stability shrank to an unusable state for serious deployment. And better don't ask about compatibility. For existing OS/2-based web applications the Seamonkey 2.7.2 R2 build from Dave is the easiest way to go btw. or for windows client systems version 2.9.1. It's only my view based on experiences with real world applications. As time permits I will cook some borscht for Dmitri ;-)

Pages: 1 ... 6 7 [8] 9 10 ... 19