@OlafS25

Ah, the old "everyone should back MY project" attitude

_________________
This weeks pet peeve:
Using "voltage" instead of "potential", which leads to inventing new words like "amperage" instead of "current" (I, measured in A) or possible "charge" (amperehours, Ah or Coulomb, C). Sometimes I don't even know what people mean.

@olegil

sorry I do not understand that. What are you referring to?

@olegil

Quote:

@OlafS25 Ah, the old "everyone should back MY project" attitude

Which project is Olaf's project that he's saying everyone should back? Or are you making an assumption?

_________________
Support AROS sponsor a developer.

"AROS is prolly illegal ~ Evert Carton" intentionally quoted out of context for dramatic effect

@terminills

perhaps he means "AROS" (even though it is certainly not "MY project").

@Olegil

it is not about supporting one project but not reinventing wheels that are already available. Good example is that there are some sources common between MorphOS and AROS. Both sides benefit from it, noone looses something.

@cdimauro

Quote:

In reality it's the exact opposite: an Amiga o.s. has only threads, and lacks processes. The Amiga o.s., drivers, and application platform runs as if there's only one process, and all the tasks are threads (which share all the memory in a common address space).

I never thought about it that way, but that's pretty much the situation. Segfaults become reboots. It really highlights the problem of trying to retrofit memory protection to AmigaOS while still retaining backward compatibility.

It was a brilliant scheme in 1985, since it was the only practical way to implement multitasking on a 7 Mhz CPU, but an original strength became a liability in only a few years. Amiga had a few of those, unfortunately.

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@OlafS25

Quote:

the problem in the amiga-community is not only the lack of resources, it is the desire to reinvent every wheel (even if the result will be worse and it is wasting resources)

I agree with you 95%, but with one footnote: people sometimes get so over on the side of not reinventing the wheel that after a while no-one knows how to make wheels anymore (to stretch the metaphor to its max. )

_________________
"Unix is supposed to fix that." -- Jay Miner

@bison

hmmm but why being able to reinvent the wheels if you can concentrate yourself instead on a decent engine or autobody? (to stretch it further )

Quote:

terminills wrote: @cdimauro Quote: Me too. But it's an unfair comparison, because Linux can count on THOUSANDS of developers (most of them coming from very big companies) whereas AROS has 2-3 order of magnitude below coders. Even if AROS is a very lightweight o.s., it can easily lose the battle from this PoV. It's not unfair to compare the reality of the situation.

Yes, we can. But doing so, I don't understand why you haven't answered to this:

"So if the hosted AROS version performs better than the native one, why the developers are wasting their (little) time with the latter? They can just focus on the former, right?"

Let's face the reality...

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @cdimauro the problem in the amiga-community is not only the lack of resources, it is the desire to reinvent every wheel (even if the result will be worse and it is wasting resources)

In this case, why don't just completely move to some Linux distribution, customizing it to look similar to the Amiga o.s.? Why reinventing the wheel, if it's just here and available?

@Hypex

Quote:

Hypex wrote: @cdimauro Quote: In reality it's the exact opposite: an Amiga o.s. has only threads, and lacks processes. I understand your point? So where is the main process?

It's running...

@cdimauro

it is a strange comment from a developer. In software-development most people use preprogrammed components that are easy to figure, there are class-libraries for decades, why not instead reprogrgramming it?

BTW I did not talk about using linux-components

Last edited by OlafS25 on 08-Nov-2013 at 05:28 PM.

@bison

Quote:

bison wrote: @cdimauro Quote: In reality it's the exact opposite: an Amiga o.s. has only threads, and lacks processes. The Amiga o.s., drivers, and application platform runs as if there's only one process, and all the tasks are threads (which share all the memory in a common address space). I never thought about it that way, but that's pretty much the situation. Segfaults become reboots. It really highlights the problem of trying to retrofit memory protection to AmigaOS while still retaining backward compatibility.

You can't have both them. Either you share everything and have a fragile system, or protect the memory and lose backward compatibility.

Quote:

It was a brilliant scheme in 1985, since it was the only practical way to implement multitasking on a 7 Mhz CPU, but an original strength became a liability in only a few years. Amiga had a few of those, unfortunately.

Unfortunately it was another Commodore fault, because it just recycled the old o.s., enhancing it only on some non-critical feature.

But that was also the way that Apple followed for a bit less 20 years, until she decided to make a net cut with the past, introducing a complete new (for the Mac users) o.s., and putting the old stuff in a sandbox.

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @cdimauro it is a strange comment from a developer. In software-development most people use preprogrammed components that are easy to figure, there are class-libraries for decades, why not instead reprogrgramming it? BTW I did not talk about using linux-components

It's a too generic talk. It depends entirely on what's the goal that should be reached.

To be clear, even with a pile of consolidate tools already available, reinventing the wheel can be a better solution than reusing/adapting an old one. Whereas in other cases sticking with the old wheels can be a "better" solution (compromise),

@cdimauro

Quote:

"So if the hosted AROS version performs better than the native one, why the developers are wasting their (little) time with the latter? They can just focus on the former, right?" Let's face the reality...

Because AROS is not a commercial product. AROS Team is not a company which has to generate income and which has to pay the developers for working on AROS source code. Finally, because for many of us working with bare metal (native version of AROS) and writing low-level code is fun.

@cdimauro

I talk about parts of the OS that are needed like most of the API, USB support, PCI and so on. Everyone does the same on its own instead of working together on the common parts and adding its own on top of it.

@michalsc

Quote:

michalsc wrote: @cdimauro Quote: "So if the hosted AROS version performs better than the native one, why the developers are wasting their (little) time with the latter? They can just focus on the former, right?" Let's face the reality... Because AROS is not a commercial product. AROS Team is not a company which has to generate income and which has to pay the developers for working on AROS source code. Finally, because for many of us working with bare metal (native version of AROS) and writing low-level code is fun.

Genau! And I'm perfectly fine with this. That's why I love AROS the way it's...

But putting some money over a project is a completely different thing, and I can understand some choices too.

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @cdimauro I talk about parts of the OS that are needed like most of the API, USB support, PCI and so on. Everyone does the same on its own instead of working together on the common parts and adding its own on top of it.

The question is quite simple: different o.s. have different APIs and/or ABIs. What you ask for can be difficult or even not desirable for the coders that have to deal with two different o.s./platforms.

@cdimauro

I talk about AROS, MorphOS and AmigaOS. They have the same (or better similar APIs). So it is possible (at least theoretic). And it is at least partly possible if wanted. One developer uses AROS to make his MorphOS ports.

Ah, OK. In principle it can possible. I think...

@OlafS25

Quote:

OlafS25 wrote: @cdimauro I talk about AROS, MorphOS and AmigaOS. They have the same (or better similar APIs). So it is possible (at least theoretic). And it is at least partly possible if wanted. One developer uses AROS to make his MorphOS ports.

How nice...

MorphOS... A pure microkernel OS that has modern (but still not yet developed) features, must run a Linux Kernel? Full OS? with some flavour of AROS (API? Hosted? Wrapped?) to obtain the same things that could obtain by just developing its QBox part hidden into its guts...

It seems a kafkian (*) joke of some sort...

(*) Kafkian = adj. Referred to Franz Kafka surreal stories.

Last edited by Raffaele on 08-Nov-2013 at 11:39 PM.
Last edited by Raffaele on 08-Nov-2013 at 11:33 PM.

_________________
"When the Amiga came out, everyone [at Apple] was scared as hell." (J.L. Gassée, former CEO of Apple France and chief of devs of Mac II-fx, interviewed by Amazing Computing, Nov 1996).