• Welcome to OS2World OLD-STATIC-BACKUP Forum.
 

News:

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

Main Menu

eCS 2.0 GA - first details

Started by warpcafe, 2010.05.06, 16:17:50

Previous topic - Next topic

Fahrvenugen

Quote from: warpcafe on 2010.05.07, 12:20:08
Hi,

@Fahrvenugen: Exactly!

@Pete: They will include a Seamonkey 2.xx on CD#2... not sure about the detailed version though.

Cheers,
Thomas

I know this is somewhat of another topic of discussion, but does anyone know if there is any work being done to allow the Java plugin to work with the newer build of Firefox, or what the difficulty is with the Java stuff on the newer Firefox?

Just wondering - I can see how eCS 2.0 (and all OS/2 / eCS users) would greatly benefit from the latest Firefox being able to work with Java.  Ideally it would be great to see a newer version of Java available,  but for the time being it would be worthwhile to at least be able to use the 1.4.2 we currently have.

Just a thought.

Joop

Quote from: Fahrvenugen on 2010.05.08, 18:37:50
Just wondering - I can see how eCS 2.0 (and all OS/2 / eCS users) would greatly benefit from the latest Firefox being able to work with Java.  Ideally it would be great to see a newer version of Java available,  but for the time being it would be worthwhile to at least be able to use the 1.4.2 we currently have.
For what programs do you need java in Firefox? Even with the older versions of FF I had switched java off and never had a problem. Java is something different then javascript, which is build in.

RobertM

Quote from: Joop on 2010.05.08, 20:35:14
Quote from: Fahrvenugen on 2010.05.08, 18:37:50
Just wondering - I can see how eCS 2.0 (and all OS/2 / eCS users) would greatly benefit from the latest Firefox being able to work with Java.  Ideally it would be great to see a newer version of Java available,  but for the time being it would be worthwhile to at least be able to use the 1.4.2 we currently have.
For what programs do you need java in Firefox? Even with the older versions of FF I had switched java off and never had a problem. Java is something different then javascript, which is build in.

Some sites use it for "enhanced upload/download" tools.


|
|
Kirk's 5 Year Mission Continues at:
Star Trek New Voyages
|
|


Fahrvenugen

Quote from: Joop on 2010.05.08, 20:35:14

For what programs do you need java in Firefox? Even with the older versions of FF I had switched java off and never had a problem. Java is something different then javascript, which is build in.

There are a lot of sites which use Java content (true Java, not just java script).  Also there are a lot of website back-ends which take advantage of Java apps for things such as file management.

A site I use which offers educational courses for apprenticeship training requires a web browser with Java 1.4.x  It works with the current (older) Firefox we have, but won't work with the newer Firefox.

Furthermore (and even more to my interest) there are a lot of custom web-based apps used on private intranets in business, which require Java working within a browser.  They just won't run with straight Javascript.

abwillis

Quote from: Fahrvenugen on 2010.05.08, 18:37:50
Quote from: warpcafe on 2010.05.07, 12:20:08
Hi,

@Fahrvenugen: Exactly!

@Pete: They will include a Seamonkey 2.xx on CD#2... not sure about the detailed version though.

Cheers,
Thomas

I know this is somewhat of another topic of discussion, but does anyone know if there is any work being done to allow the Java plugin to work with the newer build of Firefox, or what the difficulty is with the Java stuff on the newer Firefox?

Just wondering - I can see how eCS 2.0 (and all OS/2 / eCS users) would greatly benefit from the latest Firefox being able to work with Java.  Ideally it would be great to see a newer version of Java available,  but for the time being it would be worthwhile to at least be able to use the 1.4.2 we currently have.

Just a thought.
Newer Mozilla builds removed code that our Java plugin requires (actually this is true for all platforms, it is just that we don't have a newer Java with the new interface).  I think that the code *may* have been put back in for Macs (they had problems with the new interface) so that we could put it back in but we'd need someone to do the work and for many it isn't worth the effort as our Java 142 is too old to work for most sites I've been to that use Java at this point.  I had tried to patch the plugins to work with Java 1.5 but I never got that to work.  At this point, if we got a new Java then the new interface should be part of it.
Andy

Saijin_Naib

If we got a new Java, would it be the full runtime so we can run stand-alone Java apps on the desktop? This is important for me for things like a Java Media manager for my Olympus M:Robe Mp3 players (mostly worked with our 1.42 and 1.50 hacked) and the Startek Mercedes Benz Electronic Parts Catalogue.

I'd love to install my netbook into my car with my full service manual (HTML + PDF) with the Java Parts application so that I can have a nice, portable Service "book" on hands at all times.
Lucide has always been amazingly fast and light and 1.32 is no exception.

cytan

Just my 2 cents: we really need Java. (and working Flash).

cytan

abwillis

Quote from: Saijin_Naib on 2010.05.09, 04:13:11
If we got a new Java, would it be the full runtime so we can run stand-alone Java apps on the desktop?
The plugin is just an interface between the browser and the runtime.  In other words, the runtime would have to be ported (and is the real work involved) in order to have a Java plugin.  It is possible, though I was not successful, to have a plugin to point to the Java 1.5 using 1.42 executables. 
Really, what we'd really want is the full SDK which includes the runtime.
Andy

Fahrvenugen

Slightly different area of discussion, has there been any indication of what the costs of eCS 2.0 (upgrade from 1.2 / full version / etc) will be?  Will it be more then the current 1.2 pricing structure, or comparable?

Also, I'm guessing (and I could be wrong on this) that since the ACPI stuff needs the SMP kernel to run properly, is it safe to presume it'll be shipping with the SMP kernel, thus making the SMP add-on package currently available redundant?

Just wondering.

Mentore

Quote from: Fahrvenugen on 2010.05.10, 04:23:53
Slightly different area of discussion, has there been any indication of what the costs of eCS 2.0 (upgrade from 1.2 / full version / etc) will be?  Will it be more then the current 1.2 pricing structure, or comparable?

Also, I'm guessing (and I could be wrong on this) that since the ACPI stuff needs the SMP kernel to run properly, is it safe to presume it'll be shipping with the SMP kernel, thus making the SMP add-on package currently available redundant?

Just wondering.

AFAIK the latest RCs install per default the latest SMP kernel / DOSCALL1.DLL, so that the SMP package is already redundant.

Mentore

lewhoo

The one important question about new ECS is: can it be installed on HD >512 GB? Is that issue already solved? If not - I've heard and read about a filter driver - is it somehow supported by the installer, or anyone willing to install ECS on a larger hardrive has to manually mess up with installation?

If the filter driver is still only the solution (please fore give me my ignorance), could anyone share his/hers experience with it - are there any drawbacks?

And more over... as far as I remember filter driver was up to 2 TB only... so it's time is also close...

Fahrvenugen

I've got OS/2 running on a 750 GB drive, I don't recall what I did to get it running though.

It is true that the *install /boot partition* can't be huge though - the boot partition that machine is running on is only 1 GB.  I wouldn't recommend a boot partition over 1 GB anyways - you don't need anywhere near even a gig for OS/2.


lewhoo

Quote from: Fahrvenugen on 2010.05.10, 16:19:20
I've got OS/2 running on a 750 GB drive, I don't recall what I did to get it running though.

It is true that the *install /boot partition* can't be huge though - the boot partition that machine is running on is only 1 GB.  I wouldn't recommend a boot partition over 1 GB anyways - you don't need anywhere near even a gig for OS/2.

I doubt my boot partition will be larger than 10 GB - hardly a need for a boot partition larger than 1 GB on OS/2 :) I just hope that the 1.5 GB HD I'm planning to buy along with buying and installing ecs 2.0 will work without problems.

CDRWSel

Quote from: Fahrvenugen on 2010.05.10, 16:19:20
I've got OS/2 running on a 750 GB drive, I don't recall what I did to get it running though.

It is true that the *install /boot partition* can't be huge though - the boot partition that machine is running on is only 1 GB.  I wouldn't recommend a boot partition over 1 GB anyways - you don't need anywhere near even a gig for OS/2.



Just define partition to have them below 500MiB (only 500MiB are seen by OS/2 and LVM)

lewhoo

Quote from: CDRWSel on 2010.05.10, 17:08:33
Just define partition to have them below 500MiB (only 500MiB are seen by OS/2 and LVM)

You mean boot partition? Will OS/2 see the other, non-bootable, larger partition occupying the rest of the HD?