* Project: FreeOS @ 2000-01-12 0:00 Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Ted Dennison ` (3 more replies) 0 siblings, 4 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi all, yesterdy - while surfing - I found an interessting link: http://www.quasarbbs.com/daniel/freeosidx.html There are some people how want write a free OS/2 clone. They decided to use C (what else :-( ). But as the project is still in a very early phase, I think about whether we should participate and try to revise the decision to use Ada instead. This could be a chance to push Ada. What do you think about ? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-12 0:00 Project: FreeOS Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Gautier ` (2 subsequent siblings) 3 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <387C8CB3.1276637F@icn.siemens.de>, Alfred Hilscher <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de> wrote: > want write a free OS/2 clone. They decided to use C (what else :-( ). > But as the project is still in a very early phase, I think about > whether we should participate and try to revise the decision to use > Ada instead. This could be a chance to push Ada. What do you think > about ? I think they'd be way better off using Ada for a project of that scale. Bit I don't particularly pine for my old OS-2 system. There is an Ada-based OS project of sorts underway on the AdaPower site. -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-12 0:00 Project: FreeOS Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Gautier 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Michael Garrett 3 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Gautier @ 2000-01-12 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) > This could be a chance to push Ada. What do you think about ? Anyway with C they have chances to join the hundreds of other genial but unfinished `free OSes'... Try dropping the same in news:fr.comp.lang.ada - there is already a project (maybe halted...) -- Gautier _____\\________________\_______\ http://members.xoom.com/gdemont/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-12 0:00 Project: FreeOS Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Gautier @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Preben Randhol ` (2 more replies) 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Michael Garrett 3 siblings, 3 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Juergen Pfeifer @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I don't believe that writing an OS will push Ada. Ok, an OS is a fascinating piece of software, but on the other hand it is nothing more than a necessary evil. An OS in itself has no value, it is just there to serve applications. I believe a good way to attract attention for Ada is to write a popular application or service in Ada. For example there are some projects on the way to put together a comprehensive game package infrastructure. Games can be much more complex and sophisiticated than an OS. And Ada is an excellent choice for that. J�rgen "Alfred Hilscher" <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:<387C8CB3.1276637F@icn.siemens.de>... > Hi all, > > yesterdy - while surfing - I found an interessting link: > http://www.quasarbbs.com/daniel/freeosidx.html There are some people how > want write a free OS/2 clone. They decided to use C (what else :-( ). > But as the project is still in a very early phase, I think about whether > we should participate and try to revise the decision to use Ada instead. > This could be a chance to push Ada. What do you think about ? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) "Juergen Pfeifer" <juergen.pfeifer@gmx.net> writes: | I believe a good way to attract attention for Ada is to write a popular | application or service in Ada. For example there are some projects on the | way to put together a comprehensive game package infrastructure. Games can | be much more complex and sophisiticated than an OS. And Ada is an excellent | choice for that. I think that a really good Open-Source (preferably GPL'ed) web-browser that uses conservative amounts of memory and disc-space might be better. Or a good groupware/projectmanager software. This is at least missing in the Open-Source community. -- Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- [http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/] "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling." -- Athol Fugard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 0 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <m3iu0ycix4.fsf@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol@pvv.org> wrote: > "Juergen Pfeifer" <juergen.pfeifer@gmx.net> writes: > > | way to put together a comprehensive game package infrastructure. > | Games can be much more complex and sophisiticated than an OS. And > | Ada is an excellent choice for that. > > I think that a really good Open-Source (preferably GPL'ed) web-browser > that uses conservative amounts of memory and disc-space might be > better. Or a good groupware/projectmanager software. This is at least > missing in the Open-Source community. Personally, I'd love to go off and write all these projects. And when work peters out on OpenToken I probably will do one of them (if they are still feasable at that point). But sadly even if I quit my job to work on Open Source Ada projects full time I wouldn't have the time to do all of the neat projects listed in this thread, much less al the others I'd like to be able to do. Its apparent that what's lacking is not good ideas for projects, but good people willing to get them off the ground. Thus I would like to personally challenge everyone who has contributed to this thread to put their money where their mouth is. David Botton has a spot in the AdaPower lab all warmed up and waiting for you. For anyone seriously thinking about starting an OpenSource project, I highly reccommend reading ESR's essays; available online at http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/ -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Hi Ted, you are right. No one of us could do this all himself. The real challenge is to find enough people to participate. If you once have found them you can do your own job (see Linus Torvalds). Ted Dennison wrote: > Personally, I'd love to go off and write all these projects. And when > work peters out on OpenToken I probably will do one of them (if they are > still feasable at that point). But sadly even if I quit my job to work > on Open Source Ada projects full time I wouldn't have the time to do all > of the neat projects listed in this thread, much less al the others I'd > like to be able to do. > > Its apparent that what's lacking is not good ideas for projects, but > good people willing to get them off the ground. Thus I would like to > personally challenge everyone who has contributed to this thread to put > their money where their mouth is. David Botton has a spot in the > AdaPower lab all warmed up and waiting for you. > > For anyone seriously thinking about starting an OpenSource project, I > highly reccommend reading ESR's essays; available online at > http://www.tuxedo.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <387F0E96.76C0D0A3@icn.siemens.de>, Alfred Hilscher <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de> wrote: > you are right. No one of us could do this all himself. The real > challenge is to find enough people to participate. If you once have > found them you can do your own job (see Linus Torvalds). Right. To share from my personal experience, just getting a useful or promising system published is the key. If it is truly worthwhile people are perfectly willing to help improve the project. At that point you just have to try not to drive them away. :-) But someone has to sit down and devote the time to get the project to that initial state. And when I say someone, I generally mean someONE. I don't think it can be effectively done by committe. Not to pick on Nick et. al., but that is my impression of what is going on in the "OS in Ada" project ( http://www.adapower.com/lab/adaos.html ). Its suffering from a massive case of what Alan Cox called the "Town Council" effect. There has been tons of discussion, but all they really have to show for it so far is a short list of very abstract objectives. To be specific; it'll be Open Source software in Object-Oriented Ada, perhaps using literate programming techniques. I'm guessing that one of two things will happen with this project. Either Nick will sit down for a month or so and pump out a basic kernel of his own design for everyone to start hacking on, or it will dissapate into a cloud of entropy within the next 4 months. To put it another way, just talking about a project you'd like to see done isn't particularly helpful. To quote Linus, "show me the source." (reference- http://slashdot.org/features/98/10/13/1423253.shtml ) -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: David Starner @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Thu, 13 Jan 2000 01:44:38 +0100, Juergen Pfeifer <juergen.pfeifer@gmx.net> wrote: >I don't believe that writing an OS will push Ada. Ok, an OS is a fascinating >piece of software, but on the other hand it is nothing more than a necessary >evil. An OS in itself has no value, it is just there to serve applications. > >I believe a good way to attract attention for Ada is to write a popular >application or service in Ada. For example there are some projects on the >way to put together a comprehensive game package infrastructure. Games can >be much more complex and sophisiticated than an OS. And Ada is an excellent >choice for that. Nothing's going to be a quick fix. But an OS is much more primal than a game. Games come and go, get uninstalled and reinstalled, and are just one of many. OS's come one or two to a machine, and changed at great cost, and nudge all the programmers on that platform in that direction. (Think about the people who would write C in Ada to avoid the level of indirection libc would invoke. Okay, maybe this isn't such a great idea . . .) Another nice thing about an OS, is that Linux has gone through at least three points where it was broken on different versions of the compiler (bad assembly, illegal aliasing, and abuse of label addressing/inlining). I don't see an Ada OS ever having a problem with abusing the standard like that. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire. -- Friedrich Nietzsche ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David Starner @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <85jd6g$9qe2@news.cis.okstate.edu>, dvdeug@x8b4e53cd.dhcp.okstate.edu (David Starner) writes: > Another nice thing about an OS, is that Linux has gone through at least > three points where it was broken on different versions of the compiler > (bad assembly, illegal aliasing, and abuse of label addressing/inlining). > I don't see an Ada OS ever having a problem with abusing the standard like > that. That would be a theoretical OS, but since the discussion started with a goal of something that would be popular it seems likely people could not resist the temptation to make it backward compatible with something else, bringing along that baggage. I believe the most recently originated operating system that is popular today is MacOS, dating from 1984. Perhaps it is OS/400, depending on when System 34 was created. Certainly MVS, VMS and Unix are quite a bit older than 1984. Larry Kilgallen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr. ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <2000Jan13.081844.1@eisner>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: > I believe the most recently originated operating system that is > popular today is MacOS, dating from 1984. Perhaps it is OS/400, > depending on when System 34 was created. Certainly MVS, VMS and Unix > are quite a bit older than 1984. NT isn't really backward-compatable with any previous OS, and was not created until about 1994 or so I believe. -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr. 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Florian Weimer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: David C. Hoos, Sr. @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> wrote in message news:85krc6$2mj$1@nnrp1.deja.com... > In article <2000Jan13.081844.1@eisner>, > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: > > > I believe the most recently originated operating system that is > > popular today is MacOS, dating from 1984. Perhaps it is OS/400, > > depending on when System 34 was created. Certainly MVS, VMS and Unix > > are quite a bit older than 1984. > > NT isn't really backward-compatable with any previous OS, and was not > created until about 1994 or so I believe. > The first betas of NT were released in 1993 (March if I remember correctly). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr. @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Florian Weimer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes: > NT isn't really backward-compatable with any previous OS, and was not > created until about 1994 or so I believe. Work on NT started a bit earlier, I think, although it was called OS/2 3.0 then. This doesn't mean that the OS/2 3.0 actually shipped has much in common with NT 3.1, the actual OS/2 3.0 is based on OS/2 2.0 technology. On the other hand, NT includes quite a few backwards-compatibility features (DOS, WoW, OS/2, POSIX). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Florian Weimer @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Florian Weimer 0 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <87vh4xwy8d.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>, Florian Weimer <fw@s.netic.de> wrote: > On the other hand, NT includes quite a few backwards-compatibility > features (DOS, WoW, OS/2, POSIX). > NT's "DOS" window never struck me as anything more than a command shell that uses MS-DOS syntax for commands. And POSIX and OS/2 just seemed to be tack-ons, not something that inflitrated the OS's design in any way. I believe support for both has already been "phased out". -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Florian Weimer 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Terry Sikes 0 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Florian Weimer @ 2000-01-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes: > > On the other hand, NT includes quite a few backwards-compatibility > > features (DOS, WoW, OS/2, POSIX). > > NT's "DOS" window never struck me as anything more than a command shell > that uses MS-DOS syntax for commands. Come on, it's a bit more than that. > And POSIX and OS/2 just seemed to be tack-ons, not something that > inflitrated the OS's design in any way. Well, NT was designed to run on a number of RISC platforms, and the members of the ACE consortium certainly wanted compatibility with their current systems. In the beginning, I think, it was important that the system could run, say, an Ultrix subsystem, although there was never developed one. In the end, hardly anyone cared about non-IA32 platforms, and support was discontinued for one after the other. The only remaining one, the Alpha platform, is probably kept only to have a 64 bit system to experiment with today, given the fact that Microsoft will have to port NT to a 64 bit RISC platform very soon. ;) > I believe support for both has already been "phased out". Yes, of course. The POSIX subsystem is nothing more than a bad joke, and the OS/2 subsystem is 1.x only, an the PM add-on was never widely used. On the other hand, the OS/2 subsystem runs Microsoft Multiplan very well (no more struggle with EMS ;). ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Florian Weimer @ 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Terry Sikes 0 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Terry Sikes @ 2000-01-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <87zou7hehz.fsf@deneb.cygnus.argh.org>, Florian Weimer <fw@s.netic.de> wrote: >The only remaining one, the Alpha platform, is probably kept only to >have a 64 bit system to experiment with today, given the fact that >Microsoft will have to port NT to a 64 bit RISC platform very soon. ;) Alpha/NT has been officially killed. Rumor has it that Microsoft is still building Win2K/64 on Alpha, though, because it only has one Merced system in-house. There is some chance it might be resurrected, but I wouldn't bet on it. Compaq seems more interested in Linux and Tru64 Unix on Alpha... Terry -- tsikes@netcom.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr. 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Florian Weimer @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <85krc6$2mj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes: > In article <2000Jan13.081844.1@eisner>, > Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: > >> I believe the most recently originated operating system that is >> popular today is MacOS, dating from 1984. Perhaps it is OS/400, >> depending on when System 34 was created. Certainly MVS, VMS and Unix >> are quite a bit older than 1984. > > NT isn't really backward-compatable with any previous OS, and was not > created until about 1994 or so I believe. The programming interfaces are compatible with previous Windows efforts (or advertised as such) and thus it carries the baggage of providing that backward compatibility. There is even a way to get a "DOS window". Larry Kilgallen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen @ 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 0 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Ted Dennison @ 2000-01-13 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <2000Jan13.135331.1@eisner>, Kilgallen@eisner.decus.org.nospam wrote: > In article <85krc6$2mj$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, Ted Dennison <dennison@telepath.com> writes: > > NT isn't really backward-compatable with any previous OS, and was > > not created until about 1994 or so I believe. > > The programming interfaces are compatible with previous Windows > efforts (or advertised as such) and thus it carries the baggage of > providing that backward compatibility. There is even a way to get a They were advertiszed that way? They certianly aren't all that compatable. Some of the GUI calls may be similar I suppose. Now Win95 is different, and it uses many of the same calls as NT. And the NT "DOS" command shell uses the same command syntax as DOS did (for the most part). But to my knowledge NT not at all backward compatable with DOS or Windows 3.1. Its internals certianly bear no resemblence. -- T.E.D. http://www.telepath.com/~dennison/Ted/TED.html Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Before you buy. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David Starner @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) I think the spread of an (popular) OS is wider than that of any application (maybe except of Quake or Flight simulator). And this would show to the common, the use (and usability) of Ada for great projects. Ok, there maybe other large projects done in Ada, but most of them have a great disadvantage - they are secret. Juergen Pfeifer wrote: > > I don't believe that writing an OS will push Ada. Ok, an OS is a fascinating > piece of software, but on the other hand it is nothing more than a necessary > evil. An OS in itself has no value, it is just there to serve applications. > > I believe a good way to attract attention for Ada is to write a popular > application or service in Ada. For example there are some projects on the > way to put together a comprehensive game package infrastructure. Games can > be much more complex and sophisiticated than an OS. And Ada is an excellent > choice for that. > > J�rgen > > "Alfred Hilscher" <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de> schrieb im Newsbeitrag > news:<387C8CB3.1276637F@icn.siemens.de>... > > Hi all, > > > > yesterdy - while surfing - I found an interessting link: > > http://www.quasarbbs.com/daniel/freeosidx.html There are some people how > > want write a free OS/2 clone. They decided to use C (what else :-( ). > > But as the project is still in a very early phase, I think about whether > > we should participate and try to revise the decision to use Ada instead. > > This could be a chance to push Ada. What do you think about ? ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Alfred Hilscher <Alfred.Hilscher@icn.siemens.de> writes: | I think the spread of an (popular) OS is wider than that of any | application (maybe except of Quake or Flight simulator). And this would | show to the common, the use (and usability) of Ada for great projects. | Ok, there maybe other large projects done in Ada, but most of them have | a great disadvantage - they are secret. Well how do you get the OS to become popular? Remember Linux was started in 1991. I'm not so sure a new OS would be able to compete so well against Linux. It would have to be able to run Linux apps and use device drivers available for Linux. Otherwise not much hardware would be supported. My point is that making an OS is a much bigger task than making popular applications that people need and will use to do their everyday activity. If they then want to change the app, they need to learn Ada95 to do so, as the source code would be in Ada95. Thus one could attract more people to Ada95. -- Preben Randhol For me, Ada95 puts back [randhol@pvv.org] the joy in programming. [http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/] [http://www.gnuada.org/] ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Tarjei T. Jensen @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol wrote >Well how do you get the OS to become popular? Remember Linux was >started in 1991. I'm not so sure a new OS would be able to compete so >well against Linux. It would have to be able to run Linux apps and use >device drivers available for Linux. Otherwise not much hardware would >be supported. My point is that making an OS is a much bigger task than >making popular applications that people need and will use to do their >everyday activity. If they then want to change the app, they need to >learn Ada95 to do so, as the source code would be in Ada95. Thus one >could attract more people to Ada95. Linus Torvalds had a big advantage: FSG (GNU) and BSD. A lot of the things that were neccessary for Linux to succeed were already available in C source form. FSF has consentrated on providing tools so that there is something to run when the OS finally become available. Among these are: gcc, awk, perl (not from FSF), groff, etc. So the message is: Get some good applications and tools written in Ada before comitting to an operating system. Alternative: Create an (real time) operating system (microkernel) for embedded applications in assembly language (like the L3 and L4 microkernels). Then use Ada to create services. Initially target should probably be pc/104 or some PC chipset. Then create tools and systems to go with it (scheduler, tcp/ip stack, terminal drivers, ethernet driver, printer driver, usb drivers, disk (ide, scsi) drivers, firewire drivers, graphics subsystem, etc). BTW: VMS is not a bad operating system to use as a model: It is _very_ modular. Such a system could become successful. I know that rtems exists, but as far as I understand that at best only supports Ada. And it seems to be mostly C. When it is mature one could use it as a general computing platform. Which means that one must create a Unix like environment for application developers and users. Greetings, ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen @ 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2000-01-18 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 0 siblings, 2 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Charles Hixson @ 2000-01-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) "Tarjei T. Jensen" wrote: > /* snip */ > So the message is: Get some good applications and tools written in Ada before > comitting to an operating system. > > /*snip */ I don't see why the tools need to be in Ada, merely because the OS is. If the OS supports the Linux interfaces (as I expect Debian's Hurd will) then the tools can be freely shared among the two (three) operating systems. Tools can be written in Ada and run on Linux, so I don't see why all of the tools that run on the proposed OS would need to be Ada. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson @ 2000-01-18 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 1 sibling, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: David Starner @ 2000-01-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Tue, 18 Jan 2000 18:19:41 GMT, Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@earthlink.net> wrote: >"Tarjei T. Jensen" wrote: > >> /* snip */ >> So the message is: Get some good applications and tools written in Ada before >> comitting to an operating system. >> >> /*snip */ > >I don't see why the tools need to be in Ada, merely because the OS is. If the OS >supports the Linux interfaces ^^^^^ Posix interfaces. >(as I expect Debian's Hurd will) Actually the Hurd is continously having problems for funky features - no pathname limit is a legal Posix option, but not one that Linux supports, or any major Unix supports. The Hurd doesn't support Linux interfaces; it supports Posix interfaces. Any new OS that has any plans of being Unix-like should do the same. >be freely shared among the two (three) operating systems. -- David Starner - dstarner98@aasaa.ofe.org If you wish to strive for peace of soul then believe; if you wish to be a devotee of truth, then inquire. -- Friedrich Nietzsche ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2000-01-18 0:00 ` David Starner @ 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-20 0:00 ` Bryce Bardin 1 sibling, 2 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Charles Hixson <charleshixsn@earthlink.net> writes: | "Tarjei T. Jensen" wrote: | | > /* snip */ | > So the message is: Get some good applications and tools written in Ada before | > comitting to an operating system. | > | > /*snip */ | | I don't see why the tools need to be in Ada, merely because the OS is. If the OS Huh? There is no OS written in Ada. The point Jensen was saying that one should first make programs in Ada and then one could think of making an OS later. -- Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- [http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/] "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling." -- Athol Fugard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Mario Klebsch 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-20 0:00 ` Bryce Bardin 1 sibling, 2 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Tarjei T. Jensen @ 2000-01-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol wrote >Huh? There is no OS written in Ada. The point Jensen was saying that >one should first make programs in Ada and then one could think of >making an OS later. > There is at least one, possibly two OSes written in Ada. If my memory serves me right one was called tunis. I believe the source is/was available somewhere. Greetings, ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen @ 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Mario Klebsch 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 1 sibling, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Mario Klebsch @ 2000-01-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> writes: >There is at least one, possibly two OSes written in Ada. If my memory serves me >right one was called tunis. I believe the source is/was available somewhere. Isn�t RTEMS (I hope it can be called an OS in this context) written in ADA? 73, Mario -- Mario Klebsch mario@klebsch.de ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Mario Klebsch @ 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 1 sibling, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) "Tarjei T. Jensen" <tarjei.jensen@kvaerner.com> writes: | Preben Randhol wrote | >Huh? There is no OS written in Ada. The point Jensen was saying that | >one should first make programs in Ada and then one could think of | >making an OS later. | > | | There is at least one, possibly two OSes written in Ada. If my memory serves me | right one was called tunis. I believe the source is/was available somewhere. OK, but beside the point (in that context) I think :-) -- Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- [http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/] "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling." -- Athol Fugard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen @ 2000-01-20 0:00 ` Bryce Bardin 2000-01-22 0:00 ` Chris Morgan 1 sibling, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Bryce Bardin @ 2000-01-20 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Preben Randhol wrote: ... > Huh? There is no OS written in Ada. The point Jensen was saying that > one should first make programs in Ada and then one could think of > making an OS later. > > -- > Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- ... Existence proof: The F22 software (written in Ada) runs on network of processors using an OS which is itself written in Ada. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-20 0:00 ` Bryce Bardin @ 2000-01-22 0:00 ` Chris Morgan 0 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Chris Morgan @ 2000-01-22 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Bryce Bardin <bbardin@home.com> writes: > Existence proof: > > The F22 software (written in Ada) runs on network of processors using an > OS which is itself written in Ada. So does the UKRN submarine command system (where it hasn't been upgraded to Ada and C++ on Solaris yet). Also the UK Type 23 Frigate system. -- Chris Morgan <cm at mihalis.net> http://mihalis.net ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In this special case they want do an OS/2 clone. I think there are still a lot of OS/2 users who wish to continue with this system. Preben Randhol wrote: Well how do you get the OS to become popular? Remember Linux was > started in 1991. I'm not so sure a new OS would be able to compete so > well against Linux. It would have to be able to run Linux apps and use ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher @ 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-16 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2 siblings, 2 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Larry Kilgallen @ 2000-01-14 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) In article <m3hfgg4w1w.fsf@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol@pvv.org> writes: > Well how do you get the OS to become popular? Remember Linux was > started in 1991. I'm not so sure a new OS would be able to compete so > well against Linux. It would have to be able to run Linux apps and use > device drivers available for Linux. Otherwise not much hardware would > be supported. The ability of Linux to corner the market is limited to that segment of the market that wants a Unix-style operating system. OS/2 marks a different segment. If you provide Linux compatibility you are bound by the legacy Unix behavior, defeating the purpose of a "new" operating system. Certainly providing useful programs on existing operating systems is better. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen @ 2000-01-16 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-16 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) kilgallen@eisner.decus.org (Larry Kilgallen) writes: | The ability of Linux to corner the market is limited to that segment | of the market that wants a Unix-style operating system. OS/2 marks | a different segment. I was talking in more general terms, I wasn't referring to the particular effort of making an OS/2 OS :-) | Certainly providing useful programs on existing operating systems is | better. That is what I think too. -- Preben Randhol -- [randhol@pvv.org] -- [http://www.pvv.org/~randhol/] "Det eneste trygge stedet i verden er inne i en fortelling." -- Athol Fugard ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-16 0:00 ` Preben Randhol @ 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Charles Hixson @ 2000-01-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Larry Kilgallen wrote: > In article <m3hfgg4w1w.fsf@kiuk0156.chembio.ntnu.no>, Preben Randhol <randhol@pvv.org> writes: > > /* snip */ > If you provide Linux compatibility you are bound by the legacy Unix > behavior, defeating the purpose of a "new" operating system. > > Certainly providing useful programs on existing operating systems is > better. Providing useful programs on existing OS's is desireable, but different folk are interested in different things. Also, what limits does providing Linux compatibility impose? One could, if one desired, restrict the compatibility to running in a subshell of the OS rather as MSDos runs within Win95 (but possibly with better isolation). I suppose that this might result in an OS that was larger than otherwise needed, but then most of the requirements of Linux would need to be met by any other OS also, so it might not add that much. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-12 0:00 Project: FreeOS Alfred Hilscher ` (2 preceding siblings ...) 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer @ 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Michael Garrett [not found] ` <vhi3drwe773.fsf@grotte.ifi.uio.no> 3 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Michael Garrett @ 2000-01-15 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Here's my 1 cent. What about an application like the Visual Basic IDE or Symantec's Visual Cafe? The system could use a large "Component" library ( written in ADA ) as well as existing Microsoft Componenet Technology. It could also support ADA to Java Byte code, making available the use of existing Java Libraries, and Java Beans. Application wizards could be provided that not only create "Componenets" of various types but also allow the plug in of well known "Patterns" from a pattern library. The user could even create "Patterns" that get added to his pattern library for reuse. Maybe even include code generation capability from UML ............. Of course it would have to run on Microsoft Platforms as well as Linux..... Michael C. Garrett Vice President of Research and Development Medical Research Laboratories michaelgarrett@csi.com ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
[parent not found: <vhi3drwe773.fsf@grotte.ifi.uio.no>]
* Re: Project: FreeOS [not found] ` <vhi3drwe773.fsf@grotte.ifi.uio.no> @ 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Bill Greene 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff 0 siblings, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Bill Greene @ 2000-01-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Jan Kroken wrote: > I disagree. Ada is a low level language, and should not be marketed > as an alternative to Java, VB[0], Python, Perl, Lisp or other high > level languages, ... > > As a one line summary: The language we're trying to replace is C. Some would characterize Ada as a "wide-spectrum language." Certainly you can program at the lowest level of abstraction in Ada. This is one of the uses for which Ada was designed, and it was designed well! But Ada can also be used as a high-level language. I certainly don't see how Java or Visual Basic are high level languages and Ada is not. IIRC, there was an Ada translator in the early 1980s (from Carnegie-Mellon?) that generated LISP code as its intermediate representation. -- William R. Greene 1100 Perimeter Park Drive Ganymede Software, Inc. Suite 104 http://www.ganymede.com Morrisville, NC 27560 USA Phone: (919) 469-0997, ext. 280 Fax: (919) 469-5553 ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Bill Greene @ 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Aidan Skinner 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 2 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Brian Rogoff @ 2000-01-17 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mon, 17 Jan 2000, Bill Greene wrote: > Jan Kroken wrote: > > I disagree. Ada is a low level language, and should not be marketed > > as an alternative to Java, VB[0], Python, Perl, Lisp or other high > > level languages, ... > > > > As a one line summary: The language we're trying to replace is C. > > Some would characterize Ada as a "wide-spectrum language." Certainly > you can program at the lowest level of abstraction in Ada. This is one > of the uses for which Ada was designed, and it was designed well! Yes, Ada is an excellent wide-spectrum language, because it can do low-level stuff well. I agree with Jan though that Ada is fairly low level, especially when compared with Smalltalk, Common Lisp, Prolog, Python, Icon, etc. Robert Dewar wrote an interesting opinion on why Java is a disappointment; in a nutshell, Java forces you to pay the price of a VHLL but doesn't give you a much higher level view of programming than C or C++, except that you get garbage collection. > But Ada can also be used as a high-level language. I certainly don't > see how Java or Visual Basic are high level languages and Ada is not. OK, Java and VB were bad picks as representative HLLs. "Scripting language" is the right term for VB. Have you programmed in Scheme or OCaml? It is very different from Ada! > IIRC, there was an Ada translator in the early 1980s (from > Carnegie-Mellon?) that generated LISP code as its intermediate > representation. A C to Ada translator is possible too, but its existence wouldn't imply that C is a higher level language than Ada! -- Brian ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff @ 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Aidan Skinner 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1 sibling, 1 reply; 39+ messages in thread From: Aidan Skinner @ 2000-01-18 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:36:14 -0800, Brian Rogoff <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote: >low-level stuff well. I agree with Jan though that Ada is fairly low >level, especially when compared with Smalltalk, Common Lisp, Prolog, >Python, Icon, etc. To an extent this can be solved with the judicious use of libraries, although I'm not entirley sure how one would implement prolog-esque features in a "nice" manner. - Aidan -- Little Willy was a chemist, Little Willy is no more, What he thought was H2O, Was H2SO4. http://www.skinner.demon.co.uk/aidan/ ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Aidan Skinner @ 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 0 siblings, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 2000-01-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Aidan Skinner wrote: > > On Mon, 17 Jan 2000 15:36:14 -0800, Brian Rogoff > <bpr@shell5.ba.best.com> wrote: > > >low-level stuff well. I agree with Jan though that Ada is fairly low > >level, especially when compared with Smalltalk, Common Lisp, Prolog, > >Python, Icon, etc. Of these, Common Lisp is probably both the highest level and yet the most efficient. Highest because you can basically create other languages _inside_ it (note the difference from "with it"). > To an extent this can be solved with the judicious use of libraries, > although I'm not entirley sure how one would implement prolog-esque > features in a "nice" manner. Actually a "prolog-library" wouldn't be that bad. Now, try creating closures, the idea of the reader/writer, and Lisp style macros in a library. This stuff is what gives you _really_ high level capabilities, yet very efficient ones. Doable? Yes, but you would basically have to write a huge chunk of CL implementation to do it. /Jon -- Jon Anthony Synquiry Technologies, Ltd. Belmont, MA 02478, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
* Re: Project: FreeOS 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Aidan Skinner @ 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 1 sibling, 0 replies; 39+ messages in thread From: Jon S Anthony @ 2000-01-19 0:00 UTC (permalink / raw) Brian Rogoff wrote: > > Robert Dewar wrote an interesting opinion on why Java is a disappointment; > in a nutshell, Java forces you to pay the price of a VHLL but doesn't give > you a much higher level view of programming than C or C++, except that you > get garbage collection. I think that is a pretty good description of one aspect of Java "failure". I've tended to say that Java can't make up it's mind as to whether it is really a VHLL or just another statically typed compiled language. In many ways, _as a language_, it ends up being the worst of all possible worlds. In practice it definitely has some advantages... /Jon -- Jon Anthony Synquiry Technologies, Ltd. Belmont, MA 02478, 617.484.3383 "Nightmares - Ha! The way my life's been going lately, Who'd notice?" -- Londo Mollari ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 39+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2000-01-22 0:00 UTC | newest] Thread overview: 39+ messages (download: mbox.gz / follow: Atom feed) -- links below jump to the message on this page -- 2000-01-12 0:00 Project: FreeOS Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-12 0:00 ` Gautier 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Juergen Pfeifer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-13 0:00 ` David C. Hoos, Sr. 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Florian Weimer 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Florian Weimer 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Terry Sikes 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-13 0:00 ` Ted Dennison 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2000-01-18 0:00 ` David Starner 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Tarjei T. Jensen 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Mario Klebsch 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-20 0:00 ` Bryce Bardin 2000-01-22 0:00 ` Chris Morgan 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Alfred Hilscher 2000-01-14 0:00 ` Larry Kilgallen 2000-01-16 0:00 ` Preben Randhol 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Charles Hixson 2000-01-15 0:00 ` Michael Garrett [not found] ` <vhi3drwe773.fsf@grotte.ifi.uio.no> 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Bill Greene 2000-01-17 0:00 ` Brian Rogoff 2000-01-18 0:00 ` Aidan Skinner 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony 2000-01-19 0:00 ` Jon S Anthony
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox