@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Quote: Well, this way you get MPlayer, Odyssey and few other applications still actively developed. What about majority of other MorphOS (or even 68k) software? 68K apps already run using UAE with good tools like Janus/Amibridge. It'll be the same with MorphOS.

I don't quite believe UAE can be patched seamlessly enough to systems... most 68k software I use are shell commands, libraries, devices, commodities, datatypes etc which I use to get some features to MorphOS.

It's not enough just to be able use only some separate apps somehow transparently. And for many bigger applications (like Magellan2, audio players, image processors etc) I need ARexx working.. what does that Janus/Amibridge share with the rest of the system, are ARexx ports shared?

Last edited by jPV on 23-May-2015 at 04:43 PM.

_________________
- The wiki based MorphOS Library - Your starting point for MorphOS
- Software made by jPV^RNO

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @Chain-Q Quote: Chain-Q wrote: @phoenixkonsole [quote]G5 Monster can't address more than XXX RAM.. Is it on 1GB or 1.5GB? It's now 1.5GB (all systems). That's one of the 3.8 advancements for G5.

Just a question. Is it possible, on machines with >2GB of memory, to move the allocated RAM for Quark to >2GB of address space, in order to have 2GB of memory available for the A-Box?[/quote]

Quark Kernel allocation is minimal. I think that it is all memory for allocating peripherals.

_________________
"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).

@Leo

Quote:

Leo wrote: Quote: I don't call "evolution" using a patched o.s. of 30 years ago. I call it necro-computing... Isn't patching what AROS is doing ? AROS was born by reimplementing AmigaOS 3.1 API.

I think that for AROS we can talk about "Big Design Up Front". They started having a solid documentation about all Amiga o.s. version 3.1 APIs. Of course, implementation is greatly changed over the time.
Quote:

And "modern" features are being added from existing source code by adding #ifdef.. That's not really what I call a clean break.. See

The same for me. I don't like sources full of #ifdefs. I prefer that context/feature-specific stuff should be located on a few files.
Quote:

Right now, no Amiga style OS has been doing a clean and modern break from this 30 years old legacy (at least no move that is public). Not OS4, not AROS, not MorphOS. Not having compatibility doesn't mean it's a clean break.

Well, moving from a 32-bit "set on the stone" o.s. to a 64-bit one is a huge and clean break. You have to rethink many aspects, and create a proper set of APIs.
Quote:

WinXP wasn't born by patching a DOS kernel. MacOSX wasn't created by adding #ifdef MacOS_SMP.

I agree.
Quote:

A modern AmigaOS won't appear the same way...

Why not? Do you expect a continuous sequence of patches to add modern features?

I think no. I think that getting such modern features will seriously pose a challenge to the o.s. developers, since it requires a HUGE change of the code and APIs.

In the end, IMO it's better to provide a clean break, and define an Amiga-INSPIRED o.s., which tries to keep as much possible of the old API/programming models, but absolutely NOT sacrificing the new design. Since a great change is needed, it's better to go for a good design, without compromises.
Quote:

Now, the subject was MorphOS going x86. I don't see what AROS has to do with it. It is already running on x86. Fine. But then what ?

The MorphOS team can use part of the AROS code for the transition to x64, like they did in the past (borrowed some code from AROS).

BTW, it'll be wonderful both MorphOS and AROS developers set a common way at least for APIs and so on, in order to have a common platform but different implementations.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: which clearly shows that you, again, don't know what we are talking about. Quote: you've written pure lies. So, yes, it's an honor to have shown that you're a lier. But from your statements I think you'll like it, right? Some lies are good prices to pay for defending at any cost your OS4 faith... Again, thanks for you kind words.

I apologize for that. I didn't like at all what you've written, but I think that it would have been better to find other ways to express my great disappoint.
Quote:

Quote: Have you tried yourself to compile all existing AROS applications for it, Good joke! On the other hand... I would be revered as saint by AROS community for such deed.

AROS needs new beta testers.
Quote:

Quote: whereas usually* it WILL with AROS/x64 and on MorphOS x64*. This is exactly, where diffrence of our opinions is most visible: You expect most of current software will be recompiled for new OS. I think this will be case of only small fraction of applications, maintaining compatibility and addiding new features step by step (patching as you call it :- ) is only viable way.

The point is quite simple, pavlor: an o.s. which has not active applications developed / updated, is a dead o.s..

So, if there'll be no software recompiled for AROS/x64 or MorphOS x64, it means that it's better to put a stone on them and find another hobby.
Quote:

Quote: That's the reason why compatibility breaks when: Sure, sure. However, new "A-box" could be separated from new applications with only some sensible links (clipboard, same look, same integration in desktop). Entire PowerPC version of "classic" MorphOS could run in such sandbox. As this thread is about distant future such dreaming about features is permissible...

The problem is that you need to develop a PowerPC emulator, which is also integrated in the new o.s..

I don't think that it makes sense to waste resources this way. As I said before, a o.s. which hasn't active developers & applications, is a dead o.s.. R.I.P....

@cdimauro

Quote:

I apologize for that. I didn't like at all what you've written, but I think that it would have been better to find other ways to express my great disappoint.

Words don´t hurt. It isn´t always easy to deal with myself (I know as I´m expert in this field...).

Quote:

an o.s. which has not active applications developed / updated, is a dead o.s..

Quote:

So, if there'll be no software recompiled for AROS/x64 or MorphOS x64, it means that it's better to put a stone on them and find another hobby.

Quote:

I don't think that it makes sense to waste resources this way. As I said before, a o.s. which hasn't active developers & applications, is a dead o.s.. R.I.P....

Why? People use and improve even older computers/OSs than Amiga. Even BAF like myself knows, there is no way, how to revive our platform (no new blood), but we can enjoy our hobby until very last breath.

You may call that necro-computing (I like this term!), I call that passion.

Quote:

The problem is that you need to develop a PowerPC emulator, which is also integrated in the new o.s..

QEMU CPU emulators could be modified for such purpose (eg. only CPU part is used in WinUAE).

My personal hopes for a "MorphOS 4" is that it (unlike AROS) does not try to mix the new with the old in the same context. The "old" is very thoroughly covered by MorphOS 3.x. But 64-bit, SMP, true Memory Protection etc is not compatible with Amiga. It's as simple as that. It's enough with one "Frankenstein".

@jPV

Quote:

jPV wrote: @cdimauro Quote: cdimauro wrote: [quote]Well, this way you get MPlayer, Odyssey and few other applications still actively developed. What about majority of other MorphOS (or even 68k) software? 68K apps already run using UAE with good tools like Janus/Amibridge. It'll be the same with MorphOS.

I don't quite believe UAE can be patched seamlessly enough to systems... most 68k software I use are shell commands, libraries, devices, commodities, datatypes etc which I use to get some features to MorphOS.[/quote]
I agree with you: a few of the thing that you cited can be transparently integrated using an UAE-base solution.

Nevertheless, a radical change of the architecture (I mean: from 32 to 64-bit, or from big-endian to little-endian) will give no other option.
Quote:

It's not enough just to be able use only some separate apps somehow transparently. And for many bigger applications (like Magellan2, audio players, image processors etc) I need ARexx working.. what does that Janus/Amibridge share with the rest of the system, are ARexx ports shared?

Contrary to the above cases, maybe AREXX will be easier to "sync" both the host and the guest o.ses.

In the past I took a look at how to use Python for AREXX, and it seems that it's possible to both create an AREXX port for an application, and also send commands to the AREXX port of other applications.

So, if Python can be used for such things, I'm pretty confident that there should be little problems for controlling guest's application from the host one.

@Raffaele

Quote:

Raffaele wrote: @cdimauro Quark Kernel allocation is minimal. I think that it is all memory for allocating peripherals.

I don't know. Maybe some MorphOS developer can give some information about them.

But, honestly, I think that continuing to think about solutions to save some memory when the x64 port will open the doors to massive and direct access to memory, is just wasted time.

Better focus on the most important goal.

@pavlor

Quote:

pavlor wrote: @cdimauro Quote: an o.s. which has not active applications developed / updated, is a dead o.s.. Quote: So, if there'll be no software recompiled for AROS/x64 or MorphOS x64, it means that it's better to put a stone on them and find another hobby. Quote: I don't think that it makes sense to waste resources this way. As I said before, a o.s. which hasn't active developers & applications, is a dead o.s.. R.I.P.... Why? People use and improve even older computers/OSs than Amiga. Even BAF like myself knows, there is no way, how to revive our platform (no new blood), but we can enjoy our hobby until very last breath. You may call that necro-computing (I like this term!), I call that passion.

Let's say this: I already do it from long time when I use WinUAE. I can use exactly the same applications and games of the original platforms, and I see no other needs. I absolutely accept the fact that there is no more applications development or update.

But I also like to use a post-Amiga o.s., something new which founds its root from that above, but in a modern way... and hardware. So, it's a new stuff. And new experience & fun. For this I expect and wish a living platform & community.
Quote:

Quote: The problem is that you need to develop a PowerPC emulator, which is also integrated in the new o.s.. QEMU CPU emulators could be modified for such purpose (eg. only CPU part is used in WinUAE).

I know it, but patching/hooking it to interface & integrate the host o.s. requires some effort too. It's something on which some developer can think about and work after the transition.

However, without an active community which releases recompiled versions of the existing application, I think that a port to x86 of MorphOS is another waste of time. Really, if you need to run an emulator on the new platform for most of the software, then the port can be aborted before starting it.

We know that modern PCs offer good PowerPC emulation speeds, but I don't think that this is or should be the final goal.

@TRIPOS

Quote:

TRIPOS wrote: My personal hopes for a "MorphOS 4" is that it (unlike AROS) does not try to mix the new with the old in the same context. The "old" is very thoroughly covered by MorphOS 3.x. But 64-bit, SMP, true Memory Protection etc is not compatible with Amiga. It's as simple as that. It's enough with one "Frankenstein".

Then it's better to directly use the Q-Box instead of the A-Box, and start a really new o.s..

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: Then it's better to directly use the Q-Box instead of the A-Box, and start a really new o.s..

(Credit to tokai for the funnies )

Last edited by Boot_WB on 23-May-2015 at 08:25 PM.
Last edited by Boot_WB on 23-May-2015 at 08:24 PM.

_________________
Troll - n., A disenfranchised former potential customer who remains interested enough to stay informed and express critical opinions.
opp., the vast majority who voted silently with their feet.

@TRIPOS

I thought compatibility was not an issue? I can run both 32 and 64 bit software on my PC without problems, its nearly double up with system files but it doesn't matter much nowadays when storage media is not the size of floppy disks. On the software side it's almost like the Blizzard PPC cards, one can write a PPC program and use 68k plugins and vice versa. It's very nice with compatibility when most software is relatively old.

(Edit: oki, this thread was about x86. How about two emulators, like trance 1 & 2, or two Petunias? )

Last edited by Hillbillylitre on 23-May-2015 at 09:02 PM.

_________________
Using: One Commodore C64 - One Commodore Amiga 500 - One Commodore Amiga 1200 with BVision and Blizzard 68060 with PPC coprocessor running Amiga DOS - One Hellbillylitre Amigatwox86x64x6000x running Windows7

@Hillbillylitre

Quote:

I thought compatibility was not an issue? I can run both 32 and 64 bit software on my PC without problems

If we are talking about addressing then Amiga is by definition 31 bit. 32 bit binaries may run on 64 bit architecture as long as the H/W supports this. Like OS4 on PA6T and MorphOS on G5. Running mixed 32 bit and 64 bit S/W at the same time in the same context requires things from the operating system, and it's not compatible with Amiga. AFAIK of course.

@jPV

Quote:

I don't quite believe UAE can be patched seamlessly enough to systems...

Maybe you could compare it as like 10 (or whatever) physical Amigas running in parallel as "one system", linked by network.

It really won't be!

Still, this is how it's done in AROS AFAIK, and perhaps how it would be done in a "MorphOS 4" as well...?

And I also use 68k networking programs to some degree and they hardly are suitable to be runned sandboxed. Well.. maybe clients if you really have to, but not servers (I still run at least 68k ftpd and amiganetfs as servers). BTW is there bsdsocket emulation in our UAEs currently?

_________________
- The wiki based MorphOS Library - Your starting point for MorphOS
- Software made by jPV^RNO

@Boot_WB: sorry, you are right. I always think that Quark has also a Q-Box to expose it's full features set.

@jPV

Quote:

jPV wrote: And I also use 68k networking programs to some degree and they hardly are suitable to be runned sandboxed. Well.. maybe clients if you really have to, but not servers (I still run at least 68k ftpd and amiganetfs as servers). BTW is there bsdsocket emulation in our UAEs currently?

UAE has bsdsocket emulation. Maybe this thread can help you.

@TRIPOS

Sorry but if you always repeat your "Frankenstein"

there is not much new software developed for MorphOS already (I regularly look at the updates), assume that they wordly break with everything what software will run on it? Or do you think masses of developers return because of it? And it is a nightmare for developers, they have then to develop different programs with different sources for MorphOS "old" and MorphOS "new". I am developing in real world and it is the best concept to fail.

For me to have a cross-platform "Frankenstein" API sounds more appealing than to have two completely different OS version.

There are reasons why on Windows older APIs are supported and nothing drastically changed

@cdimauro

Quote:

cdimauro wrote: @jPV Quote: jPV wrote: And I also use 68k networking programs to some degree and they hardly are suitable to be runned sandboxed. Well.. maybe clients if you really have to, but not servers (I still run at least 68k ftpd and amiganetfs as servers). BTW is there bsdsocket emulation in our UAEs currently? UAE has bsdsocket emulation. Maybe this thread can help you.

Yeah I know that WinUAE has bsdsocket emulation, but does UAE versions (E-UAE etc) we are using in AROS, MorphOS etc have it? Can you now use network software under AROS/Janus? Quickly looked that thread only talks about WinUAE.

_________________
- The wiki based MorphOS Library - Your starting point for MorphOS
- Software made by jPV^RNO

@jPV

You mean on Aros X86? As far as I know not at the moment