RE: ADA os talk

["Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." <rleif@rleif.com>]

From: Bob Leif
To: Marin David Condic et al.

The XML part will be discussed at the SIGAda 2001 XML Ada Symbiosis
workshop. I should note that the output devices: screen and printer could
take XML including SVG (vector graphics) as their input. This would
significantly erode the Microsoft monopoly.

-----Original Message-----
From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
[mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org]On Behalf Of Marin David Condic
Sent: Monday, August 27, 2001 7:45 AM
To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
Subject: Re: ADA os talk


I'd suggest that "A Good Start" would be to do something similar to what
RTEMS is/does - only do it in such a way that it has the possibility of
supporting things besides embedded apps.

Start with something that would provide all of the compiler-needed
primitives to accomplish tasking, etc. so that it could be used as the RTK
for an Ada compiler (Gnat, being a good choice for availability & cost) Make
sure that it can handle a variety of scheduling algorithms so that it might
be made suitable for realtime or non-realtime programming. Include enough of
the primitive features needed so that it could execute multiple processes,
each with multiple tasks and some kind of inter-process communications.
Beyond that, it needs a boot-loader of some sort so that the kernel could be
put into some device (EEPROM, disk, etc,) and loaded into RAM at power up. A
run-time monitor would be nice so you had some ability to debug what is
running.

That's the "Good Start" - Why? If it has some kind of "real-time" mode, it
can be *immediately* useful in embedded programming. If it has left the door
open for other modes, it can be expanded over time to include whatever it
needs. (A good device driver model would be next, then you start working
your way up the ladder until you get a full NT-ish/Unix-ish/MacOS-ish
workstation-level OS.) If you had the ability to put the boot loader into an
old PC and load up the kernel from a disk drive and you had some half-way
usable, primitive monitor, you've immediately got something a hobbyist can
play with. If the same kernel can be booted in an embedded device, you've
immediately got a product that could be used in a miriad of applications and
(at the risk of pissing off the anti-Capitalist crowd) you've got something
that is a marketable product. (Put it under any license you like - at least
find a way to generate some $$$ from it since this will encourage further
development!)

The key in my mind is that the project be scoped to something achievable in
some reasonable time & level of effort and that the end result start showing
some kind of financial return in some manner to encourage the developers to
proceed with further development. Keep it simple/achievable, stay on target,
and generate a few bucks from the effort and it will likely have a future.

I like the XML part and all the rest that you suggest, Bob. I think that it
would make excellent add-ons at some point. Keep the OS open so the
tools/pieces can play in any number of realms - including having stuff that
could run portably elsewhere through something like XML as the GUI model.
And you're right in suggesting it not simply be another Linux wannabe. It
should look, act and think in Ada terms. Otherwise why bother? I'm of the
opinion that the most important thing is to set an achievable goal for it
though - otherwise it becomes something of a pipe dream. (Maybe we should
call the OS "Quixote"? :-)

MDC
--
Marin David Condic
Senior Software Engineer
Pace Micro Technology Americas    www.pacemicro.com
Enabling the digital revolution
e-Mail:    marin.condic@pacemicro.com
Web:      http://www.mcondic.com/


"Robert C. Leif, Ph.D." <rleif@rleif.com> wrote in message
news:mailman.998888394.11895.comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org...
> From: Bob Leif
> To: Mike Silva et al.
>
> Creating an Ada kernel permits a seamless Ada approach to the real-time
part
> of a program. The compiler can both check and optimize the complete
> real-time code. This Ada kernel should NOT be a translation or the
> equivalent of a thin binding to the present Linux kernel. It should be a
> well designed Ada construct. An analogy is R&R CLAW, which very
effectively
> hides the ugliness of Windows from the user. An Ada kernel should
facilitate
> the use of Ada scheduling. The creation and testing of an Ada Linux kernel
> will greatly facilitate ports to other operating systems. It is
conceivable
> that this could be a very profitable product.
>
> This kernel together with a XML based GUI could be the Ada killer
> application for which we all have been waiting.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org
> [mailto:comp.lang.ada-admin@ada.eu.org]On Behalf Of Mike Silva
> Sent: Sunday, August 26, 2001 8:29 PM
> To: comp.lang.ada@ada.eu.org
> Subject: Re: ADA os talk
>
>
> Tony Gair <tonygair@kissmyspam.blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
> news:<20010826235613.1b22c8c2.tonygair@kissmyspam.blueyonder.co.uk>...
> > This is an area I've been watching for some time.
> >
> > And I suspect a lot of people are interested in this too.....
> >
> > I would be interested to know peoples strategies for getting one up and
> running and just to get the talk rolling heres my tuppence..
> >
> > Make a ada kernal and interface it to the rest of linux operating system
> by using c interfaces and then start writing the filesystem, drivers and X
> windows, blah blah....
> >
> > what do people think ???
>
> How big is the Linux kernel?  How many calls?  While others may say
> there's no point in duplicating what already exists, I think it would
> be a a good small-steps approach (and thus more likely to actually
> happen) to getting some more Ada code and Ada awareness out there.
>
> Mike
>
>
>