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 - Fahrvenugen

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 14
121
Multimedia / Re: Multiple sound cards in eCS / OS/2?
« on: 2009.02.17, 18:36:51 »
When I tried 2 cards they were on different IRQ's and DMA's, but I still ran into difficulties upon boot.

I'm wondering if maybe part of the difficulty is within the mmpm.ini file.  It looks correct, but that file can also be somewhat cryptic to get it to work properly when something is messed up.

I also tried loading the Uniaudio drivers 2 times (the way you'd have to do if you had 2 NICs in a system and wanted to load them both up, have all the drivers loading) but this didn't work either.  With one version of Uniaud it just trapped, another gave the "can't load due to not enough memory" error (or however it is phrased, I can't recall exactly), and the third build of the driver I tried it just identified the same card 2 times.

I may actually set up a test machine and remove  and reinstall all the MMPM and Uniaudio stuff with 2 cards installed and see if I can make it work that way.

Thanks again!

122
Multimedia / Multiple sound cards in eCS / OS/2?
« on: 2009.02.17, 06:57:49 »
Hi,

I'm in the middle of a project where I'm trying to reduce the number of computers that I'm using at one of the locations I manage, and I'm trying to figure out if I can add one more task to one of the OS/2 machines I have running there and then be able to reallocate one of the machines I have doing almost nothing.

What I need to do is to either 1) Do 2 different things with the audio coming into the Line In on the sound card, or
2) Use 2 different sound cards in a single machine under Warp or eCS.

What I currently have is 2 computers set up  both doing similar things.  One is running Warp 4.5 and is acting as an audio logger - all of the audio coming into the Line In on the sound card gets dumped to an MP3 file, and every hour it creates a new file.  This is done via a simple REXX script that pipes the output from DRECORD to LAME, using a command such as:

drecord CON | lame -r -x - mp3file.mp3

The other machine is running Windows 2003, and is streaming the same audio via its Line In using WinAmp to a Shoutcast server.

What I want to try is putting the Shoutcast stream on to the Warp box.

I already have a copy of Icecast running on another Warp machine that I'd stream to.  And I've found that I can create the stream and stream it to the icecast server (in the example located below on 192.168.0.20) with something like:

drecord CON | lame -b 128 -r -x - | shout 192.168.0.20 -a -x -P Password

Or using playrec:

playrec con /r | lame -b 128 -r - | shout 192.168.0.20 -a -x -P Password

Since it is the same audio going to both, I'd like to be able to just grab the audio from the same sound card and dump it to both shout and to the mp3 file, but this doesn't work.  Even if I use the /S switch in drecord (which claims it allows for shared use of the same sound card), I'm  finding as soon as I start up another application to pull the audio, it'll stop grabbing audio on whichever I start first.

The second thought I had was just to plug 2 sound cards into the machine and feed the same audio into Line IN on each one.  But I've had trouble getting 2 sound cards to work.  If I use the Uniaudio drivers it seems to either trap on me upon boot, or if I use an older version of Uniaudio it just won't see both cards (only sees the first), even though both will work individually under Uniaudio.

I've also tried with a Soundblaster Live card with the SBLIVE drivers and had the same result/

Does anyone know if  it is possible to get Warp to run with 2 audio cards?  I know in theory it is possible, however this is the first time I've ever tried.

Also, since app that I'm using audio with dumps the audio through stdout and stdin at some point, even though they are started up in different sessions, does anyone know if this is likely to cause a problem? 

Or am I just trying to make things too difficult for me, should I just give up and keep running more machines then I really need?

I should mention (for those who think of it), I think that my Warp machine should have little difficulty generating both MP3 streams (one going to hard disk, the other going to an Icecast server).  Currently just to dump the MP3 to hard disk it only uses between 10 - 20%  of the CPU, so I believe it should be able to handle doing both.  But I could find out differently if I ever get it to work.

Thanks

123
Networking / Re: Nortel StarTalk Voice Mail
« on: 2009.02.09, 19:15:50 »
Hi,

I worked with a Nortel voice mail system built on OS/2 a few years ago.

While I don't know the specifics of your system, the one I worked on was built on Warp 3 Connect.

The 3com drivers for your 905 card that should work can be downloaded at:

http://www.os2warp.be/nicpak/files/3com.zip

Also you can check other native drivers at:

http://www.os2warp.be/index2.php?name=nicpak

As for Genmac, *if* you do have Warp 3 (or Warp 3 Connect) on that box, then my advice is to stay clear of Genmac, from what I understand Genmac can run into difficulties with Warp 3 (although admittedly I havn't tried it on any of my Warp 3 machines).  You're best to find a NIC that has a native driver (again, check the Nicpak site)

Other hints (if you're new to OS/2) You'll need to install the driver using MPTS, and probably configure it with the tcp/ip configuration application (or you can use the ipconfig app from command line, but this is a little more complex)

One other issue I ran into with the Nortel system I worked with is it was an original build of Warp 3 Connect, without any fixpaks installed, plus it had originally been set up to run on the FAT file system.  Both of these issues caused it to run slowly.  To speed things up, I installed Fixpak 40 and switched it over to HPFS, but this is not something I'd recommend to do to a system which is up and running (if it is not in current use, and you've got all the installation software and want to mess around with it some time, then this is a little different situation).  As for your own system, I have no idea how it is set up, I'm just relaying this information based on my previous experience.


But rest assured it is possible to get a Network card to work.

Hope this helps


125
Emulators / Re: Sun xVM VirtualBox
« on: 2009.01.11, 01:09:53 »
Have you even tried the OS/2 version of VirtualBox?  It actually works pretty well for what you're asking for.

http://www.smedley.info/os2ports/index.php?page=virtualbox


126
Emulators / Re: Sun xVM VirtualBox
« on: 2009.01.10, 18:48:20 »
I think the whole point is to have an option.

ODIN is great for running some types of apps.  If there's a Windows app that I need to run, and if it will run under ODIN, then that's what I'll do.  Usually the app runs quicker under ODIN then it'll run under a VM with XP running.  Furthermore ODIN does not require an additional license for XP, so anyone without an XP license, this is a benefit.

OTOH there are times when I'll fire up VBox running a build of XP (I do have a license for XP).  I usually do this for only limited uses, I do find that running XP and XP apps under VBOX is definitely slower and more cumbersome then it could be.  So usually I reserve this for limited use.

Furthermore for the times that I do need to actually use a windows-only app for something significant (an app that won't run under ODIN properly) I'll boot into XP itself. 

Bottom line is, there are uses for both Odin and VirtualBox, and I do find the two co-exist quite nicely.


127
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2008.12.20, 19:12:37 »
Hi,

I think where the questions arise is there is little information on how this kernel was developed, and so it is difficult to know what the legalities of this kernel are.

From what I see, there are a few ways this kernel could have been developed (again, without more information from those who put it together, it is difficult to know for sure).  They include:

1.  Taking the current 104a kernel and applying patches and adding additional code to it, without any source code or decompiling the kernel.   And modifying the kernel loader to allow other stuff to be loaded  up before the kernel and hook into it.   This would be similar to how Dani's Patchldr file on Hobbes used to be needed to patch the OS/2 loader to get it to recognize installed memory above 64 MB on some motherboards.  This is the most likely method that has been used to develop this kernel.

2.  Somehow getting the source code from IBM (via leaked source or other legitimate channels) and then modifying / recompiling it.

3.  Somehow decompiling the current kernel to develop a source code, and then modifying that.

As for legalities, I do agree with Roderick that any of these options would pose questionable legalities and licenses.  Here's why, I'll discuss each option separately:

Option 1:
1.  If the current 104a SMP kernel was just patched and then redistributed, then those distributing this "patched" kernel are unlikely to have a license to distribute this kernel.  The bulk of the kernel is IBM's, and unless you have a license agreement with IBM to distribute a patched kernel, then any distribution of this kernel is illegal, even if it is distributed only to those who already have OS/2 licenses to run the original kernel. 

This does not prevent you from distributing the code that has been used to patch the kernel, provided you have a license to distribute that code (or if you have written it yourself), and then end users could run that "patching" code against their own 104a kernel to create a "patched" kernel themselves (similar to how the Patchldr fix works).  I'm not sure what the license restrictions are on patching your own kernel, I'll have to check that. 

But I do know that to distribute a complete "patched" kernel package yourselves without a license to do so, yes - it is from a legal perspective considered piracy.

From my understanding of the ZIP, there is no license file included in it, so I am guessing that you don't have a license to distribute a patched kernel.  IBM's legal team is pretty good about such things, so if there had been such a license granted, I'm sure a copy of that license would have been included in the ZIP distribution file.

Option 2:
2.  If the 104a source code somehow was somehow used to develop this kernel and then compiled, then again I question its legality.  If the source code was leaked from IBM and leaked code is being used, then it is obvious that you won't have a license to modify this and redistribute.  If IBM has legitimately provided access to the source code, then there would be a license file included in the ZIP from IBM, explaining the rights and license that comes with this distribution.  As a result it is likely that if 104a kernel source code has been used for this kernel then it is an illegal use, and thus would fall under the category of piracy.

Option 3:
3.  If the current 104a kernel was somehow decompiled, modified, and then compiled and distributed, then this definitely is piracy. 

So any way that I look at it, there are serious legal questions that arise from this kernel.



129
While I did not download the file, it sounds like it did violate copyright and as such I agree that it should not have been uploaded to Hobbes.  The purpose of Hobbes is not meant to be a repository for the illegal distribution of copyrighted material, regardless of whether you believe the company that owns those copyrights ignores / abandons the software.

If IBM wanted to make VAC++ 4.0 for OS/2 (or OS/2 itself) available for anyone to download they could certainly chose to do that, and provide an appropriate license.  But that decision can only be made by people at IBM.

Just my $0.02


130
Applications / Re: ecs rc5 with os2fat32
« on: 2008.11.13, 06:57:38 »
Yes, I have also had issues with the FAT32 driver loading / not loading, unless I put the /H tag on its IFS line.

As for the "new" version of the fat32 driver, I'd definitely only recommend using it on either a test system, or a system you have a full backup of.  Otherwise use one of the known stable versions.

131
For me, working with computers I've always had the attitude of "use the best tool and / or OS for the job you're trying to do".  In some cases that is a version of Windows.  In some cases it can be Linux (or BSD or whatever).  Sometimes it may be a Mac.  Years ago (although sadly not any more) if someone asked me about the best platform for video editing / production, I'd have said Amiga.  And in some situations the answer is OS/2 or eCS.  Not all OSes were created the same, each has strengths and weaknesses.

Admittedly, if I need to run a copy of the latest version of Word or Excel (or any of the office apps), Windows is still the best way to run those apps (either in a VM or natively).  Yes I know OpenOffice will open many of those files, but I've also run into a lot of situations / files that just won't work correctly in OpenOffice (especially things that rely on complex macros and stuff) and it is just more  productive to use a real copy of Office.  Other areas where I still use windows on a regular basis includes doing such things such as audio / sound file editing.  At least once a week I find myself editing a sound file, and when comparing the tools available on OS/2 to the tools that I have in windows, there just isn't a comparison.

On the other hand, I have found situations where OS/2 (or eCS) just is the right tool for the job.  Not to say that its the *only* tool that can do the job, but at the time that I set it up it seemed to be the best option.  The biggest example I can find is in automation and server roles.   This is one area where OS/2 shines.

Here's a real world example:  About a year ago I took over the role of managing the IT infastructure for a small non-profit community radio station when the person who was doing the IT work moved to another city.  The station is volunteer run, has a limited budget, and has limited computer resources.  One system that needed immediate attention was a computer that keeps audio logs of all material broadcast.  For legal reasons, the station is required to keep an audio log of everything broadcast for at least 30 days.  Prior to using computers this had been recorded to tape, but a number of years back it was switched over to a digital system.  For redundancy there are 2 systems that do this, in the event that one system quit working the other would keep going.  When I took things over one of the computers had quit working.

The OS that was being used at the time was Linux.  Originally it had been set up on a build of Red Hat / Fedora, then later at some point it had been switched over to run on Ubuntu Server.  The problem with the computer that died was a dead hard disk.  Once I identified this and got a new hard disk, I debated whether to just run it on Linux again (as the other logger was running) or do something different.

The computer itself is a P4 - 1.8 with 256 MB memory.  Not all that impressive by today's standards, but at the time it was purchased (around 6 or 7 years ago) it was an impressive machine.

In deciding what to use for the logger I had a look at the other running logger (which was an identical machine).  The only thing it did was log live audio from the sound card to MP3's via a few scripts that ran SOX and LAME, it all ran as a CRON job.  As it was (running on Ubuntu Server) the machine was keeping up with its job of logging MP3's, but was using a significant amount of the system resources (around 40% - 45% cpu load, which again isn't a lot,  but still) for the limited task that it was doing.

On my shelf at home I keep a  few spare copies of OS/2 Warp (I've used Warp since '94, and over the years I've collected from various sources - bargin bins, people I know cleaning out software collections, garage sales, etc - additional licenses for Warp 3, Warp 4, and Warp Server... you never know when one will come in handy!), so I decided to see how well Warp could handle the job of audio logging.  If Warp did as well as Linux I'd just donate one of my extra copies of Warp to the station.

So I installed Warp 4 on a new hard disk, wrote a few short REXX scripts for the task at hand.  Within about 2 hours it was up and running logging audio and I found it was only taking about 15 - 20% of CPU cycles. 

I've since added things to what that server is doing.  In addition to logging MP3's it is running 2 web servers (each on a different port), PHP, MySQL, Icecast (for live audio streaming), FTPD, Email, SSH (for remote access), Samba (to allow others at the station to easily access stuff on it).  It also has a DVD burner on it which I frequently use to run backups.  With all of this, CPU load sits anywhere from 45 - 60% (depending on how many are accessing it at any one time). 

Could I have done that on Linux or Windows?  I'm sure Linux could have done it, although to run all the stuff running on Warp at the same level of performance that I'm currently getting I probably would have needed more memory, a faster CPU, or both.  As for Windows, I can say that I definitely would have needed both a faster CPU and more memory.  On OS/2 it just runs and was easy to set up. 

So what attracted me to OS/2 as the solution for that problem?  Simply the fact that I've used OS/2 for years, knew that it could handle the job at least as well and likely better then the other options, and I knew that I could get it up and running quickly without any significant upgrades in hardware (with the exception of course being the new hard disk) made a huge difference in my decision.

Since then I've been glad that I made the choice to go with OS/2 for that logger.  I've also switched the other logger over to OS/2 (about 2 months later the hard disk in the other logger failed, and I took that opportunity to switch Logger 2 over to an even older Pentium 3 / Warp 3 based system - which has no trouble logging MP3's, and we now use the higher powered P4 for another use).  It just plain works, doing what I need it to do and has opened up more possibilities for what we can do in the future.




132
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2008.11.08, 20:11:44 »
Did I miss something?  I don't recall reading anywhere about a new kernel being developped, other then the efforts of OSFree and (possibly) Voyager.

The only recent thing I saw was that eCS 2.0 RC6 would come with the SMP kernel, but the SMP kernel has been available for a while now.

133
Robert,

While I don't know the answers to your questions, I can think of one person who probably could shed some light on to the subject.

Does anyone know if Scott Garfinkle is still with IBM and (or more importantly) his  current email address?


134
General Discussion / Re: COMFETAR LIVE for OS/2
« on: 2008.10.26, 20:02:48 »
Quote
In time it will be up. And, we don't think that we necessarily have to wait on eComStation 2.0.

Well then you're in agreement with Robert.  If you read Robert's post, he pointed out that OS/2 (and eCS) are more then able to handle the job of running a web site - right now - no need to wait for eCS 2.0 for that.

As for the Lotus stuff, that is more a matter of your own personal choice.  Millions of websites worldwide run just fine without any need for Lotus products.

Otherwise, until something is actually up on the web (aside from in this forum) it is clear that you're talking about vaporware, Sab.

Furthermore if you really had all the financial backing of various banks and other companies that you claim, I highly doubt you'd be using a free server.  But that's just my own observation.

135
I'd suggested sysinstx.com - I've found that when I copy over an entire partition using xcopy, it usually won't boot for me until I run sysinstx

but you're right, sometimes it is not needed.

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 ... 14