I've seen the topic of replacing the OS/2 kernel come and go over the years, never really making any progress. Everyone has a different opinion, and few seem to understand what a kernel really does.
The level of interest in replacing the OS/2 kernel seems to be fairly high, yet the willingness to actually do anything seems to be zero.
As I am also in this category, I have been thinking about a way to replace the kernel without writing an entire operating system. This is what I've come up with:
If I remember correctly, DOSCALLS.DLL is pretty much the main interface between the kernel and applications (or drivers, I think). There are others, obviously, but my intentions here are to give a general perspective of an idea - not a roadmap.
If someone were to write a new DOSCALLS.DLL which could interface between OS/2 programs (and maybe drivers) and SOME OTHER KERNEL, one should be able to run OS/2 applications (to some degree) with a different kernel.
The entry points of DOSCALLS.DLL are well documented, and a lot of the OS/2 API calls themselves have documented linux replacements (thanks to IBM).
The big picture looks like this:
If the core OS/2 subsystems are mapped to a different kernel properly, you should be able to run OS/2 on top of another kernel. Additionally, since the core components would (hopefully) open source, new functionallity could be provided. This gives you the ability to take advantage of new drivers from the "stolen" kernel, as well as allow us to continue to run what it is we all desire - OS/2. Way in the future, it could be possible to eventually replace all of the original OS/2 subsystems with new components without having to start with nothing.
This would require someone to already have OS/2, but I don't think that's really the biggest problem at the moment. This is not an easy task, but it isn't quite as difficult as rewriting everything at once. In this model, one could slowly relpace legacy components over time.
Short runtime example if using a linux kernel:
* Kernel decompresses and initializes.
* After mounting the root device, linux normally runs initd.
* initd is replaced with the new OS/2 subsystem
* The new OS/2 subsystem loads the required files, and provides the proper translation passthtroughs to simulate a "normal" OS/2 environment. This could be controlled by a config.sys variant.
* After initialization is complete, you are essentially running OS/2. The only outward sign that the kernel has changed is what happened during the boot cycle.
I believe OSFree is using the L4 kernel as its basis. They might seem to have much progress but there does seem to be some working on it. http://www.osfree.org I do not know what Voyager is based on. http://voyager.netlabs.org There was some one who was doing a port of IBM's K42 but I have not heard any thing on that.
8)
Voyager said that they were considering many kernels as options and seeing as ReactOS has mentioned that they would like to have an OS/2 environment I (and only I) suspect that Voyager and ReactOS have had speaks.
http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/ROS/2
Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.12.12, 07:54:02
Voyager said that they were considering many kernels as options and seeing as ReactOS has mentioned that they would like to have an OS/2 environment I (and only I) suspect that Voyager and ReactOS have had speaks.
http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/ROS/2
You are totally wrong.
First, voyager is not about rewriting a kernel - but building free/open wps-like environment on top of "some" existing one.
Which one? No one is even close to decide, neither voyager itself is on the stage where choosing kernel would be crucial thing.
Among many options a ReactOS seems to be the worst one... Why? So after "many" years of "developing" or better to say "reverse engineering" of old variants of NT kernel, entire project seems not ready to serve as a platform to run "windoze32" apps... not to mention old 16-bits dual mode os/2 apps - what was somewhat possible until nt4... So, I (and hopefully not only I) think that all that rants about os/2 subsystem in never-ready-nor-stable-ReactOS, was nothing else but just another good looking point in very long wish list of ReactOS - and I think they were about to add that old 16 bit os/2 api subsystem, period.
They were about... just as they did to provide working and stable alternative to commercial windoze. What I'm almost sure is that there is no a single code line to turn it into reality... so it would be about what they were speaking of , and never start doing.
Lets forget reactOS it has nothing to do with os/2 yet, and it's unlikely it will change .
BTW. i did install reactOS in vbox just to look what it is like - and what I can tell it's to crappy to run typical windoze apps, like ms office - so how could it be better with os/2 apps? given the fact it's main goal is to mimic windoze and not os/2?
Don't be fooled by vapourware - it's straight way to nowhere. And os/2 subsystem of ReactOS is vaporware. Period.
What really worries me is fact you are forgetting about osfree - they have choose kernel (L4) and start to reimplementing some subsystems already... way much more than spreading hypes about how will be reactOS valid as os/2 replacement...
Please, be serious and don't waste people's time and attention.
It's always good to "Go and Check" (google for instance...) before you start another "weird idea's contest 2008"
Os/2 under ReactOS is dead, it been never meant to happen, it was just hype. Good looking - but hype.
Big Warp Guy wrote: "There was some one who was doing a port of IBM's K42 but I have not heard any thing on that".
So if you have not heard so how do you know it was? Have you seen?
Guys, please don't turn this forum into "kernel choosing theme park", let's be responsible and serious... We should, if we want somebody to wrote modern kernel for us. I do want. Do you?
osw >:(
Voyager is NOT about creating a new OS anymore. They have shifted away from that in favor of creating a new way of handling information - which will fail because it's too far ahead of its time.
Quote from: chennecke on 2008.12.12, 16:43:05
Voyager is NOT about creating a new OS anymore. They have shifted away from that in favor of creating a new way of handling information - which will fail because it's too far ahead of its time.
Kinds of reminds me about Open Doc. Ahead of its time and doomed to failure.
David
Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2008.12.12, 07:54:02
Voyager said that they were considering many kernels as options and seeing as ReactOS has mentioned that they would like to have an OS/2 environment I (and only I) suspect that Voyager and ReactOS have had speaks.
http://www.reactos.org/wiki/index.php/ROS/2
I bookmarked the site. Thank you for the link. 8)