Author Topic: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel  (Read 17156 times)

PAUL555

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 60
    • View Profile
Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« on: 2008.04.07, 04:45:52 »

 Does Serenity systems and / or IBM have any plans for a 64 bit kernel upgrade ? If not , it looks like version 2.0 will be the last version of ecomstation ?   

Paul 

Fahrvenugen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #1 on: 2008.04.07, 05:16:19 »
While it is still technically a 32 bit kernel, the current kernel 14.104a runs great on 64 bit processors.

As for a 64 bit kernel, Serenity currently does not have the source for the 32 bit kernel available, and IBM has pretty much stopped all OS/2 development, with the possible exception being minor fixes for those who still have maintenance contracts.  So no, I don't see a 64 bit kernel coming from either of those sources.

The best option right now is to put your efforts into Project Voyage.  At the moment there has been no decision as to what kernel Voyager will use.  However considering the current direction in personal computing it would make sense for all those on the development team to consider 64 bit kernel options.

saborion2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
    • Orion Resources International
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #2 on: 2008.04.07, 06:46:24 »
Re: "As for a 64 bit kernel, Serenity currently does not have the source for the 32 bit kernel available, and IBM has pretty much stopped all OS/2 development, with the possible exception being minor fixes for those who still have maintenance contracts.  So no, I don't see a 64 bit kernel coming from either of those sources..." Question: Are they not enough OS/2 oriented "geeks" on planet Earth who can come up with a "work-around" for the development of an "64-bit Kernel"; but, then again - the name ought not to (cannot) be OS/2.  ::)

warpcafe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 746
  • Failure is not an option.
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #3 on: 2008.04.07, 09:28:57 »
Question: Are they not enough OS/2 oriented "geeks" on planet Earth who can come up with a "work-around" for the development of an "64-bit Kernel"; but, then again - the name ought not to (cannot) be OS/2.  ::)

Saborion2, now... that's a really good question once for all! :-)
The simple answer is: Maybe. ;-). If you talk about doing a 64bit-version of the OS/2 kernel, then we have the main obstacle that the *current* kernel is not open-sourced (or rather: The source code is not legally available). Regarding manpower... well, I don't know. I think that if IBM would open-source the kernel, it would be suprising to see how much of our geeks would jump to the occasion and I'm convinced that these guys would do the job. But:
Considering that there are already working open-sourced 64bit kernels available that have stood the test of time, I wonder how much sense it would make to re-invent the wheel with a 64bit OS/2 kernel (given the fact that this consumes almost all manpower we have in development).

As for "the name ought not to (cannot) be OS/2.": Yes, you're definitely right on that!! And even from the viewpoint of leaping towards future in a "marketing" way, I would even more support that idea. The sad truth is that we have the dilemma of the name: While "OS/2" implies most but not all positive attributes to the insider(s), it has nothing but negative associations for the not-insiders, meaning... potential new customers.

Regards,
Thomas
"It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.
By definition, there are already enough people to do that"
- G.H. Hardy

saborion2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
    • Orion Resources International
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #4 on: 2008.04.07, 16:01:47 »
"warpcafe" you have said;
Quote
The simple answer is: Maybe. ;-). If you talk about doing a 64bit-version of the OS/2 kernel, then we have the main obstacle that the *current* kernel is not open-sourced (or rather: The source code is not legally available). Regarding manpower... well, I don't know. I think that if IBM would open-source the kernel, it would be surprising to see how much of our geeks would jump to the occasion and I'm convinced that these guys would do the job. But: Considering that there are already working open-sourced 64bit kernels available that have stood the test of time, I wonder how much sense it would make to re-invent the wheel with a 64bit OS/2 kernel (given the fact that this consumes almost all manpower we have in development).
The thing is; there is no point in saying:
Quote
I think that if IBM would open-source the kernel
Since it should be quite known what was the response to the Second Petition Letter by the OS/2 World Foundation to IBM which in part states that this cannot be done as there are "legal" and other reasons involved. So, the real question at this point in time is what's "next"; since, the eComStation Kernel in itself is not Open-Sourced. :-X

warpcafe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 746
  • Failure is not an option.
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #5 on: 2008.04.07, 17:42:21 »
Sab, you somehow again managed to disappoint me althouhg I was hoping for an improvement giving you starting this thread... phew... ok:

You say
Quote
The thing is; there is no point in saying:
Quote
I think that if IBM would open-source the kernel
since it should be quite known...

You don't need to tell me. I have signed more than 1 petition to open-source it since the 1990s.
When I said "if IBM would" it was meant *hypothetically*, ... like in "IF", you know?
That's why I wrote "IF" by the way.

I'll repeat more detailed, perhaps there was some noise:
Even if IBM would ever open-source the OS/2-kernel (did you get the hypothetical part?) it would not make any difference:
The skills needed to "upgrade" a 32bit-kernel to 64bit are at least(!) the same like those needed to create a 64bit-kernel from scratch. Moreover, even IF we had a workarounded-64-bit-kernel - what would we do with it? Because at that moment, we would find ourselves at ground zero again: No working drivers, no working software, no WPS... everything would need to be put hands-on again. Once we're done, there's a 128bit-kernel by M$ and Linux and even my mobile phone would be better than this new OS in all regards.

So, for heavens sake: Let the geeks do voyager, let them select the microkernel to go along with it and there you go. And if there is something you need, request, want: Put up a bounty and bring the bucks in. You told me wonderful things about your experience in funding international stuff - ok, but how many bounties did you sponsor HERE?

Regards
Thomas

"It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.
By definition, there are already enough people to do that"
- G.H. Hardy

DavidG

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 350
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #6 on: 2008.04.07, 17:54:22 »
Question: Are they not enough OS/2 oriented "geeks" on planet Earth who can come up with a "work-around" for the development of an "64-bit Kernel"; but, then again - the name ought not to (cannot) be OS/2.  ::)

In my opinion no.  Not without the source code.  All the programmers I know are already working on more than one project.  Some can't handle anymore workload.  And remember, most of these programmers are not getting paid!  They do this in their spare time.

That is why everyone in the eCS/OS2 community needs to do whatever they can to help contribute, whether it be
1. Development and programming
2. Graphics: bitmaps, icons, and PNGs for various projects
3. Giving advice on the various forums to help those having problems
4. Helping those web sites that need help
5. Money, whether is is supporting bounties or making donations to various projects at Mensys

The one thing we don't need is more bitching or infighting.  We saw this with the Warpin project which could have spilled over into the XWP project and possible others.  If you must criticize, make it constructive and do it in a professional manner.

With the next release of Open Watcom, we should see the end of our need for VAC.  Steven Levine has made substantial contributions to get OW to the point where VAC should no longer be needed.  One of the present problems is that VAC has always been needed to do development in OS/2 and eCS.  Only those that owned a copy could program.
« Last Edit: 2008.04.07, 18:00:43 by David Graser »

saborion2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
    • Orion Resources International
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #7 on: 2008.04.07, 19:28:00 »
Hi "warpcafe",
Quote
So, for heavens sake: Let the geeks do voyager, let them select the microkernel to go along with it and there you go. And if there is something you need, request, want: Put up a bounty and bring the bucks in. You told me wonderful things about your experience in funding international stuff - ok, but how many bounties did you sponsor HERE?
I thought that you were already aware that the one (1) bounty that was sponsored by Orion (in my name) so far is for the "Port of IBM's Lotus Notes 8.0 to the OS/2 Operating System. Also, consideration is underway for increasing this amount; and/or, the possibility of attracting bank ( http://www.iadb.org ) funding for this project once the respective "Bounty Hunter/s" can be identified and negotiations/agreements entered into. ;D ;) ;D
« Last Edit: 2008.04.07, 19:29:35 by saborion2 »

Fahrvenugen

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 203
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #8 on: 2008.04.08, 01:25:07 »
Just to comment, *even if* we had the source code for the kernel, I'm not sure what that would do for us.

From what I understand (and I could be incorrect on this, but I seem to recall hearing this from reliable sources who have actually worked on the kernel for IBM), much of the OS/2 kernel is coded in straight assembler code.  If you've ever looked at assembler code, it is extremely difficult to port to another platform (such as turning it into a 64 bit kernel). 

On the other hand, if IBM were to hypothetically release the kernel from the Power PC version of OS/2, this was based on the MACH kernel, and in theory should be easier to port to other platforms.  However in reality I can't see this code being released either.


saborion2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
    • Orion Resources International
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #9 on: 2008.04.08, 06:14:37 »
Just to comment, *even if* we had the source code for the kernel, I'm not sure what that would do for us.

From what I understand (and I could be incorrect on this, but I seem to recall hearing this from reliable sources who have actually worked on the kernel for IBM), much of the OS/2 kernel is coded in straight assembler code.  If you've ever looked at assembler code, it is extremely difficult to port to another platform (such as turning it into a 64 bit kernel). 

On the other hand, if IBM were to hypothetically release the kernel from the Power PC version of OS/2, this was based on the MACH kernel, and in theory should be easier to port to other platforms.  However in reality I can't see this code being released either.

Well, to be quite honest with you; and, from what you have said above may be equated to the same as "If Horses Were Wishes Then Beggars Would Ride".  :( The very simple question to you at this time is this: Just how much longer must OS/2 users continue to wait after all the years we/they have been waiting only to be confronted with the situation we/they are in presently. Isn't it time that there is something "really tangible" (a pragmatic approach to this situation) that can be taken to the "banks".  ::) ::) ::)

Best regards.
 

warpcafe

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 746
  • Failure is not an option.
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #10 on: 2008.04.08, 10:52:28 »
Hi Saborion2,
-good to see you back on track ;-)-

Isn't it time that there is something "really tangible" (a pragmatic approach to this situation) that can be taken to the "banks".  ::) ::) ::)

Definitely. You're right.
But from a corporate viewpoint, a tangible offering/product is not enough. It needs to be wrapped with service. At least as an option to show that there is professional support and services available for the product. And that's another open checkpoint on the todo-list (for Mensys? Serenity?).
Even if the corporate consumer decides to provide these services on its own... there must be a SPOC or reliable contact for the consumers needs. Even if Mensys builds a supporting network with SoHo-companies... there must be a dedicated, reliable and ORGANIZED backbone at Mensys (or Serenity?) for these SoHos then. This is the main obstacle I see at the moment.

But... as you said: Never say never. :-)

Cheers,
Thomas
"It is not worth an intelligent man's time to be in the majority.
By definition, there are already enough people to do that"
- G.H. Hardy

herwigb

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 115
    • View Profile
eComStation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #11 on: 2008.04.08, 11:02:06 »
Citing Neil Waldhauser on the same subject:

"There is virtually no advantage to a 64-bit kernel for OS/2. To gain any advantage at all, each of the many bits of the operating system, each as complex as the kernel, would need to be replaced with 64 bit bits. The 32-bit kernel (typo corrected by me) we have is fine for a while, assuming the ACPI project can reach a good level of success.

Far more important is replacing each IBM part with an open source equivalent. Once that is achieved, and we own the interfaces, then replacing the kernel with something modern is easy. While we still have IBM parts in the system, IBM can stop supplying us and then the game is over.

The best future for eCS I can see is via the Voyager project."

Pretty much that is also my opinion.

Kind regards,
Herwig B.


Kind regards,
HerwigB.

Criguada

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #12 on: 2008.04.08, 12:56:19 »
I thought that you were already aware that the one (1) bounty that was sponsored by Orion (in my name) so far is for the "Port of IBM's Lotus Notes 8.0 to the OS/2 Operating System. Also, consideration is underway for increasing this amount; and/or, the possibility of attracting bank ( http://www.iadb.org ) funding for this project once the respective "Bounty Hunter/s" can be identified and negotiations/agreements entered into. ;D ;) ;D

Where is this thing? (the bounty)
I don't see it anywhere. There is a bounty for "Native OS/2 Port of Lotus Notes (Hannover)", but I don't see "Orion" anywhere in the list of sponsors. Also I'm not particularly impressed by the amount presently sponsored.

Bye
Cris

saborion2

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 548
    • View Profile
    • Orion Resources International
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #13 on: 2008.04.08, 14:45:39 »

Where is this thing? (the bounty)
I don't see it anywhere. There is a bounty for "Native OS/2 Port of Lotus Notes (Hannover)", but I don't see "Orion" anywhere in the list of sponsors. Also I'm not particularly impressed by the amount presently sponsored.

Bye
Cris


Hey Cris,

Apparently you do not know that "(Hannover)" was is fact the Code-Name for what is now IBM's Lotus Notes 8.0; and, you can glean additional information in relation to the "Orion" linkage to this particular "bounty" and COMFETAR LIVE from the below attached link:

http://www-304.ibm.com/jct09002c/gsdod/solutiondetails.do?solution=14283&expand=true&lc=en

COMFETAR LIVE is intended to mirror UNIDO's  "COMFAR": (see the below attached link):

http://www.win2biz.com/comfar/default.htm

with possible financing option from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB):

http://www.iadb.org

All for your kind information.  ;)


Criguada

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
    • View Profile
Re: Ecomstation 64 Bit Kernel
« Reply #14 on: 2008.04.08, 15:49:14 »
Apparently you do not know that "(Hannover)" was is fact the Code-Name for what is now IBM's Lotus Notes 8.0; and, you can glean additional

No, I definitely did not know. Should I?
And BTW I am not very interested in the package, I was just interested by your assertions about being able to sponsor.

I still fail to see the connection between you and Orion Resources Intl.
mmmhh... "S...{removed by moderator for privacy protection}"... is it you?

BTW, the home page of this "Orion Resources Intl" thing is just the usual placeholder page placed there by domain vendors apparently, and I still am not very impressed by the amount sponsored for such an undertaking.

Bye
Cris
« Last Edit: 2008.04.22, 08:40:07 by warpcafe »