[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Sphere
Andrew Cherry wrote:
> >You are, in my book...
> >
>
> Have you tried playing? Make a little kernel. Not your
> mammoth-new-operating-system-that-will-revolutionize-the-world-and-make-T
> ux-hide-in-shame-and-Bill-buy-you-out -- just a toy kernel. Hello
> world+?
Maybe after I can get Oskit to compile... I really like the notion of
making tux hide in shame; I think I'll add it to my quotefile. =)
[30 minute download]
> BACKUPS!!! Download once, back it up to some removeable media, even X
> floppies... And make a friend with a fast connection.
Yeah, but that only lasts a few months untill they release the next
snapshot... =\
[proto-jiberish error message]
> Now, I don't pretend to know what the problem here is -- I know I
> compiled the OSKit itself without a hitch -- I just ran out of space
> when compiling example kernels and haven't had a chance to go back
> after repartitioning my drive (that's this weekend or next...).
Repartitioning your drive?!?!?!?! Um Lets see... The last time I did
that was back in the spring of '97.............
> You have an error -- track it down. Find out what it's conflicting
> with.
Something in the compiler, apparently. Though I do not know the correct
syntax for the ASM directive in GCC...
> If you're running BeOS, that could be the problem right there...
BeOS is incomprably better than linux or BSD; its almost as good as
Apple's OS-X... I can do things that take me two weeks or more in Linux
in less than two minutes under BeOS!!
> I don't remember off the top of my head if BeOS is a permissible
> development base.
Probably not. Open source developers are profoundly snobbish.
> and even if it is, RTFM -- who knows what special things need to be
> done for BeOS? I don't... do you?
I will probably need to do that soon. =\
At least get a printout of the manual for GCC...
> That's what takes the time. You have to start with the trivial, modify
> the samples, try things. Can you boot a sample kernel?
Almost certainly no...
> Get that working before you worry about any of the complex stuff.
It would help if the makefile for GCC under BeOS worked... =\
(probably some arcane syntax error that would require an expert to
spot).
> >I barely even know what you are talking about... I can't even get ISP
> >dialup working under BSD.
>
> WinModem, I'm guessing.
Absolutly not!
I would never touch those things!
How dare you make such an accusation! ;)
> If it's a configuration thing, read up on BSD and Linux -- there are a
> couple of very good books discussing the Kernel design for BSD and
> Linux available, you might want to look at those, too (just as an
> aside).
Linux: Free
CD-ROM to make it convenient to install: $30
Books to understand how to make it do something useful: $300
> OSKit provides CONCRETE IMPLEMENTATIONS of various abstractions.
That much is taken for granted... Wheather those implementations are in
a form that is at all useful is a different question...
> Yes. But the OSKit is a concrete system, not some theoretical topic.
But asserting that it is possible to get a net benefit from the use of
oskit is, in my mind, equivalent to the assertion that there is a Loch
Ness Monster; or that an elf with a team of raindeer delivers toys to
all the kids of the world shortly after the winter solstace...
What I am getting at is that the rubber hits the road when I hit
"make"...
The only piece of software I ever successfully installed from source and
collected useful work from was an IRC bot, but then that thing was on
the scale of a quarter-megabyte and was therefore nearly foolproof.
Free software promices so much; but I have not yet seen it deliver a
usable useful system.
> I'm very glad that the OSKit is a toolkit -- otherwise it wouldn't be
> very useful to me!
I have not gotten *ANY* GNU tool to ever work properly.... Either
through buggy code that wouldn't compile or AWOL documentation...
> You seem to be blending the idea of a programming abstraction with a
> communications abstraction. And abstractions are useful in both.
They are of the same class. The former is a proper subset of the latter.
> But the OSKit provides something behind the abstraction -- both the
> pointed rock-tipped stick and the "spear."
I had an axe in mind with my description. That should say something to
you.
> Package and sell? Right. Sorry, this struck me as a bit...
> inappropriate.
No; not at all... Ofcourse I am using a general definition for "sell"
but the overall idea is the same: to help devels find use for your tool.
> We know what a runtime linker and loader is. We'd be
> the ones to write something useful... like "Flexi-Loader(r) (tm) (c)".
It took me 18 months to finaly peice togeather what a linker actualy
did... =\ I will need time to complete a suitability study of ELF for my
purposes; if it isn't suitable then I will need to hack togeather my own
BFDs... =(
> *blink* You took entirely too much Psych in college.
Philosophy is better than psych... The former I Aced; the latter I
Flunked...
[Making it bootable]
> >How; show it to me...
>
> He's talking in general, starting from scratch. The moment you compile
> a kernel with OSKit, it has a bootable entry point. Unless, of course,
> you're changing the boot loader -- in which case, no guarantees. :)
If I recall correctly, OpenBoot specifies a boot signature that is
located by a scanning process. How do you ensure your signature is where
it needs to be?
How do compile your stuff such that this works?
> PLAY! And switch to Linux, get off your little graphical interface.
Linux is nearly the worst OS currently on the market... Even MINIX is
better. =)
> Okay: Upgrade to Windows 2000. I refused to give my DOS prompt up.
Me neither; to this very day!
> If you're stuck on a Command Line fetish, get Linux, and don't install
> X.
I would need X to run netscape. =(
> It's so much more fun, and powerful, than DOS could ever be.
No. DOS is the absolute best PC OS in existance bar none.
I do not want it to be FUN; I want it to be USEFUL. Fun is what Colossal
Cave (XYZZY) is for. ;)
> And a drive won't die if you install something on it that you later
> delete -- TRUST ME. You have a 60gig drive -- set it up tonight! Start
> using it tomorrow! There's no use in saving a drive for an "OS that
> deserves it." Just install, keep important stuff backed up, and
> reinstall if you make a mistake.
I'd wish; DOS can't make use of something that mamoth; and BeOS is the
only OS that really deserves the space but it crashes when I start doing
things like decompress a large tarball (such as GCC) to it.
> So did you figure out what caused that problem? Like the VFAT driver
> being expected by the kernel, or mentioned in an init script?
I wouldn't know how to read the Init script even if I knew how to locate
it.
> Mandrake is an easier install, and will get you up and running faster.
I am not inclined to care. Linux doesn't offer me anything that is worth
the frustration of trying to use it.
> Multiboot -- able to boot boot images/kernels in multiple formats --
> ie, a Linux kernel, DOS, OSKit, BSD, etc.
Yeah, but how do you make sure your binary works?
> And getting Grub working isn't much different than getting LILO working
I MIGHT look at it... eventually... Right now I am most concerned about
making something that is worth booting.
--
> what with the X-based and menu-based LILO config makers, LILO is a
> piece of cake.
GUI != USABILITY
GUI != USABILITY
GUI != USABILITY
Minix's booter, with only a line-mode config utility, is much easier
than many graphical programs. Ease of use comes from sanity of design;
not pretty pictures.
> >--
> >NUKE NIGERIA!!!! (419)
>
> I MUST have missed something...
The third largest industry in Nigeria is conducting Section 419 fraud
against wealthy americans and europeans. The revenues are on the order
of three billion dollars! Even I got targeted by one of their
attempts...
Nigeria is a criminal nation; I would consider nuking them an
appropriate police action.
--
NUKE NIGERIA!!!! (419)
http://users.erols.com/alangrimes/ <my website.
Any usage of this e-mail account is subject to the terms and conditions
specified on my website.
Follow-Ups: