>> and the examples. I'm not a genius either.
>You are, in my book...
Well.... if you insist...
> I tried to build the thing under BeOS (A 30 minute download on dialup)
> and this is the error I got running "make":
I don't remember that oskit supports BeOS, it should if you have the whole set of tools needed to build it but.... Anyway it seems the version of gcc you're running is too old
>> I've modified sample kernels and booted them without any problem.
>Do you understand it enough to design a non-trivial kernel to use it? ;)
Except for a few doubts about when static linking vs. COM is used. Actually I think my problem is I don't know how to design a non-trivial kernel rather than how to use OSKit to make it.
>> And looking at the list's archive I've suceeded at building the BSD
>> boot adapter which configure fails to configure on its own.
>I barely even know what you are talking about... I can't even get ISP
>dialup working under BSD.
I'm using FreeBSD, there is a chapter in the handbook about how to set-up a dial up connection and there is the "Pedantic PPP Primer" if the handbook is not enough, all of it you can find in www.freebsd.org/docs.
>> So I don't understand what is your problem using OSKit, its
>> documentation and the mailing list.
>See above.
I think I'm getting to know where your problem is.
>> BTW once again in this discussion it must be said that OSKit is a set
>> of tools for developing an operating system, not an OS itself so there
>> is no abstract stuff in its documentation.
>Gronk?
>Oskit is bursting at the seams with abstractions!
>A whole boatload of them are listed in the table of contents alone; let
>me point them out to you.
You told you were good at understanding abstractions!!!
.
.
.
Anyway, there are a lot of abstractions encapsulated in its libraries, there is no single abstraction behind the whole kit, except the fact that it is a set of utilities and libraries.
>- Virtual memory. (A lame abstraction that was stamped into the 286+
¿? Virtual memory has nothing to do with 286 altough it had support for some VM lookalike.
> The point that Oskit is "just a toolkit" should be a point of
> *SHAME* not pride!
The standard C library is a set of tools, it provides many abstractions as strings, files, proceses, etc, but there is no single abstraction of the entire library. I don't see any point of shame in it.
In this particular case *YOU* are the one that has to provide the abstraction.
Regards
Ricardo