Yuri Prokushev 8.25.2004
1) Still here. At the present time build system preparation in progress 2) ReactOS
kernel selected as first kernel (because lack of resources and for ROS kernel not
so many forces are required) 3) LVM _much_ better in comparation with FDISK
4) Java will be supported via subsystem (if ROS kernel will be main kernel) or
via classical JVM. 5) Filesystem will be _any_ for which driver will be installed
Old Forum messages
Re: Old Forum messages
Warper 8.25.2004
Yuri, thanks for your answers. My problem with LVM is that it writes the configuration
information to the partition's system area and it can cause many incompatibility problems.
I think it would be better to implement a way to handle volumes like Unix and Linux do:
partition untouched and information written to a config file on the system partition.
Yuri, thanks for your answers. My problem with LVM is that it writes the configuration
information to the partition's system area and it can cause many incompatibility problems.
I think it would be better to implement a way to handle volumes like Unix and Linux do:
partition untouched and information written to a config file on the system partition.
Re: Old Forum messages
Yuri Prokushev 8.25.2004
Warper, still to far for LVM really.
Warper, still to far for LVM really.
Re: Old Forum messages
Warper 8.25.2004
Of course. I just thought about it. I'll try to contribute to the project later but
I've no experience in OS/2 programming.
Of course. I just thought about it. I'll try to contribute to the project later but
I've no experience in OS/2 programming.
Re: Old Forum messages
osFree: an environment subsystem for OS/2 above the ReactOS executive 8.27.2004
If you look at the NT design, you can see how you can implement OS/2 the way MS did, but
making it a subsystem process running above the ReactOS executive and kernel. In NT and
ReactOS there is the concept of "dominant subsystem", which Cutler was told to be OS/2 at
the beginning of the NT's era, but later turned to be Win32, because of the success Windows
3.0 had. Nobody prevents you to fork ReactOS and make osFree the dominant subsystem, or
a regular subsystem like PSX, VMS, JOS etc.
If you look at the NT design, you can see how you can implement OS/2 the way MS did, but
making it a subsystem process running above the ReactOS executive and kernel. In NT and
ReactOS there is the concept of "dominant subsystem", which Cutler was told to be OS/2 at
the beginning of the NT's era, but later turned to be Win32, because of the success Windows
3.0 had. Nobody prevents you to fork ReactOS and make osFree the dominant subsystem, or
a regular subsystem like PSX, VMS, JOS etc.
Re: Old Forum messages
Yuri Prokushev 8.28.2004
2Anonymous: You talking about known issues.
2Anonymous: You talking about known issues.
Re: Old Forum messages
Sergey Posokhov 8.30.2004
Yes, of course, with WPS installed. Time, time...
Yes, of course, with WPS installed. Time, time...
Re: Old Forum messages
Yuri Prokushev 8.30.2004
2Sergey Posokhov Also ReactOS is not exactly what we want, but as starting point
its preffered kernel because a) already existis all (or most) of required functions
b) not so much resource required to make somthing useful. Later ROS can be easely
replaced bu other kernel if required.
2Sergey Posokhov Also ReactOS is not exactly what we want, but as starting point
its preffered kernel because a) already existis all (or most) of required functions
b) not so much resource required to make somthing useful. Later ROS can be easely
replaced bu other kernel if required.
Re: Old Forum messages
Wesley Parish 9.13.2004
I've just had a look at the Odin source, specifically the pe2lx code. I'd say that there's enough
there to start writing an OSFree loader - at least, to base one on the definitions in the *.h. All
that would need to be done would be to get the Odin folks agreeing to OSFree using their code
- still, it'd be getting it used. And the more the merrier - at least, that's what I think.
I've just had a look at the Odin source, specifically the pe2lx code. I'd say that there's enough
there to start writing an OSFree loader - at least, to base one on the definitions in the *.h. All
that would need to be done would be to get the Odin folks agreeing to OSFree using their code
- still, it'd be getting it used. And the more the merrier - at least, that's what I think.
Re: Old Forum messages
Yuri Prokushev 9.14.2004
2Wesley Parish: Which task you want to do? LX Loader?
2Wesley Parish: Which task you want to do? LX Loader?