Quote from: MrJinx on 2012.06.11, 16:39:57Wait some day pls - I add register to resource manager and rtl816x. Then I place this to hobbes.
Pasha, Is there an updated binary version available yet? I have the atheros chipset in question.
This is an old OS2World backup forum for reference only. IT IS READ ONLY!!!
If you need help with OS/2 - eComStation visit http://www.os2world.com/forum
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.
Show posts MenuQuote from: MrJinx on 2012.06.11, 16:39:57Wait some day pls - I add register to resource manager and rtl816x. Then I place this to hobbes.
Pasha, Is there an updated binary version available yet? I have the atheros chipset in question.
Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2010.03.03, 00:15:11After svn2059 versions as well. Stable..... In ny i7 is very stable ;-)
Okay... so what does this mean?
It is something you are fixing in your custom patched kernel?
Does this mean that Os/2 will become more stable now?
Quote from: mobybrick on 2009.10.08, 19:19:35
Pasha: Can you confirm: OS/4 kernel does NOT have this problem, i.e. it is fixed in it?
Quote from: Pete on 2009.10.08, 16:34:36
Hi
I doubt if IBM would have any interest in fixing anything OS/2 related - they have been trying to bury OS/2 and pretend it does not exist since 1996.
It is not clear whether this bug is in both the iBM JFS and the eCS BootableJFS builds; maybe Pasha can enlighten us further?
I would also guess that a good proportion of drive letters in a system with over 19 drive letters would be network drives. Probably a good case for installing NetDrive to get around the problem - or does that fail also in this case?
Regards
Pete
Quote from: warpspace on 2009.10.08, 12:47:10I don't know. I must say about this bug, because I am author of Jresucuer ;)
Would it not make sense to pass this serious bug to IBM, perhaps Mensys should seek a solution?
Quote from: djcaetano on 2008.12.18, 14:30:06
Hi Roderick!Quote from: rwklein on 2008.12.18, 13:39:34
What they distributed was a patched 104a SMP kernel from IBM. Its a DEBUG kernel! This means when an application crashes the debugger inside the kernel kicks in (unless they patched that out some how). The kernel is trying to talk to the serial port. If you connect a serial cable to another system and run a terminal program like ZOC you will most likely get a debug prompt.
I could be wrong but basicly with every application crash your system seems to freeze. But the debug kernel is doing its job. Its just not documented in the docs this type of behavior.
So your system seems frozen...
In my view its also very silly to distribute a debug kernel to the general public. Its a debug kernel and it has a purpose. A debug kernel is clearly something you should not install on system "just as".
Oh, I know that debug kernel provides serial output, but never tried it myself... I didn't know about this "freeze" behavior.
That means the readme should mention this, at least. But I agree with you: is a debug kernel has this behavior, I do not
see the point of releasing it, since it is not safe to be used on a daily basis.
If the intent is testing the kernel in a "semi-production" situation, then the "release" version of the kernel would be the way.
Thanks for this explanation.
BTW, do you believe the freeze (not trap) in the boot process is the same situation? I ask this because that freeze sometimes happens even with IBM's release SMP kernel.
Quote from: saborion2 on 2008.07.09, 17:11:04
Hi "pasha",
A few observations:
Re:Quote1. os2ldr and os2krnl use IBM DDK
2. I don't see normal GPL project from 199x to current day
3. I don't think, that this will intrested for linux
4. I don't think, that this will help project
So, we have to see , that source can't be open as GNU and GNU term. But... Why open as GNU? Source os2ldr and os2krnl can open for anybode(y), which want help and know how help.
Since it ought to be well known that IBM has responded some time ago to an OS/2 World Foundation's Petition Letter that the OS/2 Source-Codes cannot be Open-Sourced due to "legal and other reasons" (then one ought to take this as a given). However, I am curious though as to the present agreement in place with IBM (and, perhaps other companies) that enabled development work to be carried out on the "os2ldr and os2krnl" project.
Additionally, (from an earlier question) is there; or, will there be a focus on the development an 64-bit "os2krnl" in order to; re:Quotesurvive in the 64-bit modern computing paradigm --towards where all other modern OSes are moving?
Thank you.
Regards,
SAB