Re: Progress on AdaOS (Was: Re: How Ada could have prevented the Red

[Didier Utheza <ddutheza@bu.edu>]

The same problem arrived in the case of freeos (the free OS-2 project).
Actually the soul of the project (the initiator) gave up and this created
a vacuum. People talked a lot but did not have incentive to write some
code. In the case of Hurd, I will say that everybody is right. Hurd
appeared once Linux showed that it was possible to accomplish such a
project. It looks that the GNU fundation took the project out of the
drawer then. It is still an incomplete system. Now, I beleive (I may be
wrong) that the *BSDs were here before Linux. But for some reasons they di
not make it in front of the scene (possible reasons: too many divergences
in the core development team: OpenBSD, NetBSD, FreeBSd,... that posed
problem for the development of the critical parts, and they missed the
internet horse. I do not say that the *BSDs are not operational. They are
pretty good systems, actually better than Linux in many points (M$ uses a
*BSD system as a server for hotmail after w$nt blew the service up several
times. They still have the audacity to host a webpage that critisize Unix.
An old fellow sure, but it works). But the big wave of internet
cooperation around Linux eventually profited *BSDs, they did not initiate
it.

Now, in the case of AdaOS. The project has, as you said, two major
difficulties. The first one is to develop a C-independent compiler. This
implies to actually develop several kernels to address the various
processor (intel, alpha,...). The development of an Ada compiler is not
given to everybody. Maybe a cooperation between the AdaOS team and the
GNAT group could ease things a little bit. Everyone will gain from it, and
the time spend on it would be less.

The other difficulty is of course to start developping the OS itself. As
it was said in the thread, if you have to wait for the compiler before
developping the OS, it will become a fuzzy dream (it may become it
already). Now since we have GNAT, it is still possible to start something
and the members of the team that direct the project will have to do  at
some point the transition. The GNAT group may be interested (a scary
thing is that c(++) real time system are appearing now - they reinvent 
the wheel!), they may not have the manpower for such a project but have
the experience. Also, many dedicated and embeded AdaOSes exist and the
experience is there. A question: what is the compiler used to develop
these OSes?
The people that say that the project needs to show some code directed to
the OS are rigth. The problem is who is going to do it. Who has the time
and the knowledge to embark in this project?
So, here comes the main question: what happened to Nick Robert. A
leader or leaders (people to keep the project on the move) is needed. Nick
is the one that created the project andnobody seems to know what happens to him (the administrator of the AdaOS
site: Marcelo de Freitas doen't know himself.

At last, there are plenty of people (like me) that play with Ada and do
not have a clue in system/OS programming but would like to help. With a
little bit of directive a lot can be done on the doc, code
duplication,...side.
*BSDs and Linux were able to take off because a limited number of people
with the deep knowledge of OS internals gave to the following layer
something to build upon. It looks that any free open project to develop
through the web would have to follow this path.
There are very good Ada name in the AdaOS project. The knowledge is here,
something just has to be done with the coordination.
That is the most difficult step in my opinion.

			Didier Utheza.