osfree.org

Sergey Posokhov 2.4.2005

I start "PM Queues & Hooks" chapter

Yuri Prokushev 2.5.2005

Good progress, Sergey! BTW, do you have an idea about project infrastructure? We need
good starting environment for the project.

Jukka Valvanne 2.19.2005

Just to remind ya. It's also Microsoft who has code in OS/2. It's not only up to IBM releasing,
it requires agreement from M$. OS/2 was created by M$ and IBM, they we're developing it
together. I highly disagree M$ would release any character of their code in OS/2 for any kind
of OpenSource related project. (at least on OS/2 ver. 2.1 and 3.0 Warp). Not sure about Warp 4.

Eric Auer 3.1.2005

Hi, I wonder why I am listed as DISKCOMP / SORT developer, I only baby-sitted those tools
for FreeDOS: http://www.freedos.org/freedos/software ... skcomp.lsm
current maintainer is Steve Nickolas http://www.freedos.org/freedos/software ... e/sort.lsm
I am indeed current maintainer, but the original author has certainly done more for that one...
So... this is an OS/2 clone project? Funny idea. OS/2 was like DOS with matching GUI stuff,
as opposed to Win, which is just something running on top of a separate DOS. What do you
think of the idea of shipping FreeDOS with Regina REXX instead of shipping it with a BASIC
interpreter, by the way? ) You can send feedback through the FreeDOS.org page and
fd-doc.sf.net.

Yuri Prokushev 3.5.2005

Eric, IIRC original author also listed. If no I'll add him. And no, DISKCOMP and SORT just ported to OS/2. FreeDOS not shipped (may be in future as VDM part). And REXX is OS/2 language, not BASIC

Yannick 3.6.2005

The ReactOS project is looking for people willing create an OS/2 subsystem. Instead of
re-creating OS/2 from scratch, wouldnt it be easier to create a subsystem for WinNT/ReactOS?

James McCarte 3.6.2005

I would LOVE to help develop this project, by writing documentation and/or writing code.
I'm not a great programmer, but I LOVE the idea of this project and would love to use it as
an opportunity to develop my skills. I HATED seeing IBM abandon OS/2, so I love the idea
of this project

James McCarte 3.6.2005

I have one slight problem here: I have a computer with no floppy drive, and am not sure how
to install OS/2 on a system without a floppy drive

Sergey Posokhov 3.8.2005

2Yannick: it is difficult to develop OS/2 over WinNT kernel. The reason is memory management.
2James: We're still in a deep research state. I wrote more than 700 pages about OS2Krnl, DevIO,
IFS, VIO and PM. Today I started "PM Common Controls" chapter.

Samuel A. Falvo II 3.9.2005

Just signed the OS/2-4-free petition. Good idea! That being said, I think a wholesale
re-engineering of OS/2 (and calling it OS/3) is a fantastic idea. I wish I could participate.
I do have some L4 coding experience. I am not confident that ReactOS would make a good
target because it is so heavily built to run Windows software. But if kept modular, building
OS/3 on top of L4 would make perfect sense. There would be relatively little need for 16-bit
drivers anymore (just hack Linux drivers to turn them into real 32-bit OS/3 drivers), and
they'd run as normal processes (like Windows NT "services" or Unix daemons). If a driver
crashes, it won't bring the whole system to its knees (as NT/XP currently do). Just restart
the driver like any other background task, and continue. It'd make fault tolerance and
process mobility much easier, making support for large server clusters almost trivial, etc.