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 - rwklein

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 12
121
Internet / Re: Need help choosing eCS Compatible Hardware
« on: 2009.06.08, 22:21:27 »
Hi everyone,

I am new here and I am after a new computer (custom built of course) and I am choosing my hardware. The problem is, unlike my last mistake with my current hardware, I want to make sure this new hardware will in fact run eComStation. I want to get an X58 based motherboard with an Intel iCore CPU, a  good graphics PCI-E graphics card such as GeForce 9600 GT etc. Are there places I can compare hardware that tells me whether it will work with eCS?

My current hardware: Gigabyte GA-965P-DS3 motherboard with JMicron controllers and I've tried the demo CD so many times and I could not get it to work. You see the logo and it just hangs. I have a feeling it's JMicron that is not supported or may be an issue with the motherboard (I had a few issues with this one in the past)...



The demo CD is outdated. Right now there is not being worked on this. But the design what needs to be done on this is being looked into this. New NIC drivers, Panroama for graphic support, UNIAUD to support modern audio chipsets, new firefox and new Daniele driver for SATA support. And Flash 10 (which should be released shortly for public beta).


Roderick Klein
Mensys

122
Hi,

first of all: Good write.

Secondly I have to bring your attention to one LARGE difference regarding ACPI "standards" in my mind:
If you are Microsoft, you can invent your own floavor of ACPI implementation. All board manufacturers will automatically try tro be compliant with what you invented, otherwise their systems will not run as intended and they risk to lose the whole Windows marketshare for their crap. That's simply the way it goes.
Why do youo think there are so many dirty ACPI hacks out there which are more or less not compliant to "standard" ACPI? It's because of Microsoft.

In turn that means that the eCS guys have to discover the deltas for standard ACPI in each and every mainboard / chipset out there. Or - recode "MS-ACPI" from scratch.

Next, in my mind the problem is not only the project management but also the way how people collaborate:
If ACPI developers aks for "report your model" and then sit and wait for people/users to give feedback, it will NEVER EVER work.
The only reasonable method to achieve a substantial coverage in hardware reports is to have a tool which is painfree: 1 program only - you run it and it gives a report of all relevant information - you send it to a web adress (best case would be to have the tool do the upload automatically).

In a perfect world, I would expect that tool to be integrated in the eCS setup automatically. Or even better: When you install eCS, the thing collects information and aska you if it can upload the data. Done.
For those who have access to modern machines on a more frequent basis (dealers, service providers) it would be handy to have thta tool an a bootable CD or USB thumb drive:
- you see a new machine somewhere
- you plug in the drive or boot it from the CD
- you collect the ACPI and system information
- you upload it online or save-to-file and upload it later

But: Having people to read 3 or more readmes, then run 5 or 7 programs and collect 3 to 4 files to report that on a russian website via copy and paste after having to create an account with their forum is just crap. Moreover it is simply unprofessional and outdated.
That's why there is not enough information about hardware.

Regards,
Thomas

The first thing Thomas writes is correct, the ACPI in daily live does not function as on paper. Infact the German computer magazine C'T did a test with 10 mainboards and installed nacked Windows XP on it. The test results where quite depressing (this was about 2 years ago). Only one board worked with the standard ACPI driver of Windows XP. The bother boards had difficult.

The opinions on this topic vary. But some people claim the so called AML tables (that contain the ACPI code in your BIOS) is sometimes not fixed by vendors. What they do in an OS preload on your system is sometimes ship an updated driver for Windows to work around the problem. Hence the problem for other OS'es like eCS and Linux. Next to that most Linux distro's still have a difficult experience with suspend resume (S3 sleepstate). Multiple people that work intens with Linux tell me its not a pretty picture either.

One good point is that eCS has a pretty generic small driver set.  The problems we are finding like the embedded controller seem to be happening on more machines (acpi 3.15). Also suspend resume seems to in range...

When it comes to having a tool that collects information for eComStation and ACPI. Ever seen the feedback wizard ?
This has been in eCS since RC 5. http://ewiki.ecomstation.nl/ACPICompatibilityReport

So there is being worked on the railway track at all sides.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

123
I agree with You both, and You Warpcafe has just nailed-it !

Well since eComStation RC 5 we do ship the feedback wizard. You can see it at this page:
http://ewiki.ecomstation.nl/ACPICompatibilityReport

So we already collect data. The data that came back is from RC 5 RC 6/6a.
Note that when the user elects to not to exit the wizard we do not get any data.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

124
I am referring to loading 32 bit OS/2 executables above the 512 line. (flagging the 32 bit memory and data objects to load high).

I cannot go into detail about what I am doing, but let it suffice to say that I have some applications that need to remain on the OS/2 platform until they can be re-platformed (these are homegrown apps).  The system they are running on has been having "issues" that I have traced to excessive fragmentation and\or "fillin-up" the shared memory arena.

on a side note does anyone have a lead on where I can get XR_C005???  my company did have a support contract which would have gotten this, but....

many thx.


Well if you load it high will it fix the problem ? Since the application will still leak memory...

I work for Mensys (www.mensys.com/www.ecomstation.com). You can drop me a line at rwklein@mensys.nl. We sell eComStation and have fixpak 5. But I don't know from which kernel this expermenintal high loading was introduced in.

125
Hi,

is that the "DOS Loadhigh" you're talking about (for the VDMs, DOS "boxes")?
Or are you referring to a core OS/2-related thing here? In the latter case I seem to remember that there was something in XWorkPlace about it. Perhaps will see if I can find more info on that... hopefully I have XWP on my VirtualBoxed eCS, else you'll have to wait for tonight when I get home (or someone else chipping in).

But before curiosity kills me (and during the time I'm searching for info...) may I dare to ask what's the intention behind it - or, what do you want to achieve or benefit from with it?

Cheers,
Thomas

Based on what mayhem43 "flagging executables" to load high. I guess he is referring to using exeheader todo that.
You can try mayhem43 but its like lighting a match in a gunpowder room. When Scott from IBM still worked on the kernel he experimented with this but from what I remeber he never realy advised to use it. But do some digging in groups.google.com.
Scott Garfunkle from IBM. This thread might give some slightly more information:

http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.os2.programmer.misc/browse_thread/thread/2c12b83256820765/60aa1d1a7ae917be?q=exehdr+os/2+high#60aa1d1a7ae917be

Aaah this is statement from Rich Walsh in the thread:

Scott G. had put out a revised version of exehdr that let you mark 32-bit
code segments as "HIGHMEM".  Sadly, the changes to the kernel that permitted
loading code high were never fully debugged.  Use the feature and you're
guaranteed to get a trap in the kernel sooner or later.  When used with
Mozilla, it would occur about 1 time in 4 - always while shutting it down,
and always resulting in the complete disappearance of files like bookmarks
and prefs.js.  Too bad, as this feature alone would have given OS/2 a whole
new lease on life...

--

Its one of the features thats on the list to see how that can be fixed. But that for eComStation is something that is past eCS 2.0 and 2.1. Open Office,  and since about 1 to 1 1/2 years Firefox and Thunderbird use high memory to store data!
So if you open a big Office document or have a big browser cache it will at least not use the low memory region.


Roderick

Roderick

126
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.04, 14:13:42 »
What I know is that WIN32K.SYS method (patching in memory) (as Andy Willes explains) has the least to none of the technicall problems.
This method is suitable only for small, second boot phase patches.
How you can patch kernel from driver to show another (vesa) boot logo?

I never stated that the WIN32K.SYS patching method is a sollution for all. But the point is how to keep the current project legal ?

Roderick Klein
Mensys

127
Hardware / Re: Danis
« on: 2009.05.04, 10:46:17 »
To Roderick: will this project include only new DANIS506 driver, or is it posible to we see updating of LVM and DASD manager ?  I'm not a programer, just an AIHU, but look's to me that existing DASD and LVM are deficient ?  There is also starting point; DASD manager writen by Daniela, but for non-LVM systems only. It support more partitions than LVM system, and make more easy using external memory devices, like flash disks ?

Right now the danis506 driver. This is past eCS 2.0 as I mentioned before. The DASD stuff is also on the list to be done but this is after AHCI support.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

128
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.03, 23:34:38 »

Who owns the intellectual rights to OS/2 and hence the OS/4 kernel. That is IBM not OS/4 team.  Well take a look up close at the source code of the WIN32K.SYS driver. I just tried to find it. The code for ODIN must be somewhere with the WIN32K.SYS driver from Knut. Thats one way of doing certain updates to the kernel.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

I have never met that OS/4 team has ever declared any rights to OS/2 kernel. Of course, it is the intellectual property of IBM. Moreover, in the documentation that goes with the kernel from OS/4 team it is clearly stated : You can use this packet only having valid license to run OS2KRNL.

At the same time, I have to note that you keep saying that it is illegal and continue to ignore my repeated question what exactly is illegal.

Here I go trying to ask once again: if OS/4 distributes a software to do the patching of the original and not an already patched kernel, will this take the legal issue off?

If you don't give clear answers now, I will have to consider all your declarations about illegality as such that have no grounds.

From my point of view I have given pretty clear answers to your answers. I don't think you understand strictly how copyright works ? If you place a copyright on piece of software or music  you also have certain legal rights to defend this copyright.
Its clear the OS/4 team has not developed the kernel for 100%. I have asked 2 people who looked at it and its clearly to a large degree its a patched IBM kernel code.  Hence that they may not intend to do it in that fashion but by putting a copyright claim on it for OS/4 Team 2008. Is clearly a violation of international copyright laws.

So to mention that you should have a valid license to run the OS2krnl  in the readme is like saying. He here is a re-mix of a house CD, I Roderick put the copyright on it. But I put a note on it. "If you have a purchased a copy of the CD of this artist its still oke".

IBM has never given permission to sub-license the OS/4 kernel and modify it to such a large extend. As to the patching I did not fully answer that question but did answer indirectly. That WIN32K.SYS answer I gave. An executable that the would send out to allow people to patch the kernel on there own would be less illegal that is certainly the case. But still a bit on a slippery slope.

What I know is that WIN32K.SYS method (patching in memory) (as Andy Willes explains) has the least to none of the technicall problems. A patch tool to patch the kernel on your private hard disc, don't know would need todo more research.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

129
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.03, 20:16:27 »

...The kernel is indeed a violation of the law because the remove/ added the copyright statement of IBM...

...Second distributing the kernel in such a fashion with patches in it is also a violation of the law...


Coming back to OS/4 kernel, if I understood you correctly, they have to remove OS/4 copyright and distribute a not patched kernel but a software to patch the original kernel, right?


Who owns the intellectual rights to OS/2 and hence the OS/4 kernel. That is IBM not OS/4 team.  Well take a look up close at the source code of the WIN32K.SYS driver. I just tried to find it. The code for ODIN must be somewhere with the WIN32K.SYS driver from Knut. Thats one way of doing certain updates to the kernel.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

130
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.03, 20:12:29 »
So... can Mensys help to make OS/4 kernel legal? As, being no developer, I understand, it shouldn't be that difficult: no copyright violations, in-memory patching. It would be nice to see one day, that Mensys and OS/4 team cooperation resulted in legal, good new kernel :)

I still don't have a clear understanding of who Team/OS/4 is. And I have some questions in there directions how they did certain things. Mensys/Serenity Systems has a business relationship with IBM and our private users and companies. The legal aspect is a very important  one of that relationship with our customers and with IBM.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

131
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.03, 20:09:01 »
Yes, I am understand legal/formal reasons, but another side look - OS/2 story is a story of child, who killed by own parent. May be, not by IBM itself, but with help of some .... like Lou Gerstner or any other "big chief". Kernel story is a good demonstration too (even Mensys can`t get sources).
In-memory patching is "legal", but bad idea ;) 1) it forbids original IBM os2ldr, 2) it is not easy to find memory for patch file on boot ;)


If you dig back to OS/2 and what I all did on the platform and MMOS/2 with other people I have also invested a few years of live to it. Sometimes upto 120 hours a week, during week and weekends and nights. OS/2 has a history with IBM and it went the way it went. OS/2 is business for IBM and it has partly gone the way because of certain things that happened...

So there is a harsh side to the story of how OS/2 has lived its live so far. As I typed before a lot (not everything) can be fixed without kernel sources. I have talked to a lot of people about this, experts like Daniela. And kernel sources are handy but there are plenty of ways around current kernel problems. I wrote that before! Look what we did to eComStation over the past 8 years. I wish it would have all gone faster instead of so slow. But it was all done with kernel source code!

And more is possible! If you want to keep OS/2 alive I hope we can do it in the form of eComStation.  IBM has the copyright on OS/2 and we can buy licenses. Hence why we can still sell it to companies that need it.

If this new OS/4 kernel would just sit in a legal corner the way its now we can not even *start* consider to use it.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

132
Hardware / Re: Danis
« on: 2009.05.03, 19:58:21 »
I don't know why you  make a mystery about the name of the developer, but you will have your reasons. The list of developers isn't that long anyway and maybe you only want us keep in excitement :-)  Happy puzzling...

Some of the developers we have, like the one who is working on Flash I want to keep his name silent to some degree silent. I rather have most of our developers work in silence on projects. Most people also don't know who makes the Open Office port to OS/2/eComStation.
In the past some of the developers where washed with emails people asking if they could have the latest beta of something.
Over the years we have learned that its better if the developer can work on the project.

As with Flash its just the proof of the pudding so the eCS community can get binary to judge for them selves.

And yes I do have access to some developers not generally  known in the community.  Infact have access some of these people are ex IBM nobody knows even anymore or at least few people... People that worked in Boca Raton, Texas where OS/2 was partly developed.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

133
Hardware / Re: Danis
« on: 2009.05.03, 15:36:42 »
I'm not saying that nobody can do the development. But judging from what I've seen over the past years, finding someone with the right skill set and the time and willingness to take over has become a huge problem, especially if drivers are concerned. If you have found such a person, I'm definitely all happy about that. That certainly takes a load of my mind. :)

I would not speak up in public unless I found confident I have found somebody that can do the job :-)

Roderick Klein
Mensys

134
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.03, 14:47:11 »
I agree with lewhoo  - OS/2 community definitely  would benefit from this kernel.
And that is why it is better to support OS/4 Team rather than criticize.

Rwklein, once (#62) I have already asked about your suggestions - how you see it should be - unfortunately, there was no answer.

It looks like you really have something in your mind but you don't want to share it.
Please, advise what is illegal in OS/4 kernel:
- presence of OS/4 copyright
- distribution of patched kernel
- etc.

It's a pity, but from your posts it  is absolutely unclear what you consider illegal. I think OS/4 team will appreciate all your suggestions.

From my point of view, for example, it should not be a big deal for them to remove the copyright string or distribute a not patched kernel but a software to patch the original one.

At the same time I would not want to believe walking_x, who said that Mensys might have some hidden motifs.


I would really like to support this kernel. But when it comes to copyright law in Western Europe and the United States. The kernel is indeed a violation of the law because the remove/ added the copyright statement of IBM. But they pay no royalties to IBM even. Mensys and Serenity Systems do so.

Second distributing the kernel in such a fashion with patches in it is also a violation of the law.
A patch as win32k.sys does from a legal point of view is clean.

If the community would this kernel to be of us it needs to be legal. Otherwhise it useful for private usage.
Guess why Mensys did not include MP3 support and other video codecs. Everything that is included in eComStation is licensed from vendors or in depth research has been done to make certain no intellectually rights property where violated.
Including the OS/4 kernel in the eComStation distribution would do so.

When it comes to working with the community Mensys and Serenity Systems try to there best to do so. And eComStation has always been a community/company effort. With Mensys/Serenity systems investing money. For example we hired a developer for 20.000 Dollars who is ex IBM to debug UNIAUD. Paul Smedley can confirm that the developer Richard Jerant removed bugs that would have been difficult to find by other people. Mensys will pay a developer to get AHCI support to eComStation.
We pay for ACPI support, we pay for Flash development and the Open Office port.  We run the VOICE mailing lists, provide Paul Smedley with FTP space for his software, CVS netlabs runs on our server. We work with Netlabs

Mensys people like me and Joachim have always been closely involved with the community like me doing www.warpweekend.com and involved with Warpstock and many other items we sponsor and infrastructure we provide.
I'm just listing some of these things because I know very well the importance of the community. We need the community and some the work the community needs us. (If you want more details I can explain why the community needs us.)
So it goes both ways in call kinds of ways.

The comment I have on the kernel in my view is 100% justified since its illegal (I just pointed out why) and we could support the developers but we do not and can not endorse illegal software.

Roderick Klein
Mensys




135
Comments, Suggestions & Questions / Re: New kernel
« on: 2009.05.03, 14:21:48 »
From my point of view, Mensys position is clear: "this guys must work for us for free and give us all, what they done" ;) And copyrights only is a good shield for main idea ;)
And as far as i know, no one is specially hide something from Mensys ;) - this effect is result of long term holy war between Eugene Gorbunov and maintainer of Linking to this site is not permitted on our forums ;)

In that respect Mensys does not want something for free. If something is done properly and in a legal sense. Then Mensys pays for it. Infact I would hire the OS/4 team if its legal.

We want all for free ?  look at this presentation I gave at Warpstock 2008 ?

http://wse2008.warpevents.eu/uploads/tx_wseevents/wse2008_all08_ecomstation_2.0_and_beyond.pdf

Page 5. We hire Pasha to work on ACPI. Is ACPI performing we would like it to work, not yet. But its a very complex project. And we have hired more developers on a project basis.

Roderick Klein
Mensys

Pages: 1 ... 7 8 [9] 10 11 12