Linux-Development-Sys Digest #854, Volume #6 Mon, 21 Jun 99 14:14:22 EDT
Contents:
Re: Game/Casino Server... ("Jonne")
Re: vesafb for S3 868? (Modemch)
Re: Embedded Linux Question (Wolfgang Denk)
Re: [printer drivers] (Shai Ayal)
Re: RAID-1 and 2.2.9 revisited (John Burton)
Re: SCSI CDDA Commands (Wez Furlong)
Re: Microkernel? (Alexander Viro)
Re: mounting ftp/http (Alexander Viro)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Paolo Torelli)
Microkernel? (Paolo Torelli)
Re: Ultimate OS ("Selious")
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (void)
Re: help with SAMBA pwds (Jun Yang)
Problem! (Michele)
Re: Mainframes, Filesystems, Databases... Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Paolo Torelli)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (void)
Re: Need for a 128-bit (Unix or other) OS? (Tristan Wibberley)
Re: v2.3.7 does not compile, (errors attached :-) (Aki M Laukkanen)
Re: using C++ for linux device drivers (Tristan Wibberley)
Re: using C++ for linux device drivers (Tristan Wibberley)
Re: TAO: the ultimate OS (Terry Murphy)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Jonne" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To:
alt.comp.linux.isp,comp.os.linux.development,comp.os.linux.development.apps,linux.redhat.misc
Subject: Re: Game/Casino Server...
Date: 21 Jun 1999 09:40:02 GMT
Tom Emerson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> schreef in artikel
<7kdr2n$p35$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> some time back I wrote a blackjack program that you could use telnet to
> access -- imagine that, instant cross-platform compatability!
Great, and what kind of programming language did you use?
Maybe interested in a project of programming such a thing?
>
> [hint: think of a dos/command-line variant of the games and you're in --
> sure, it's not "flashy", but hey, the idea is to enjoy the game, right?]
As long as i can give the parameters through the internetbrowser its
alright with me. Just have to think about security!
------------------------------
From: Modemch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: vesafb for S3 868?
Date: 19 Jun 1999 13:09:22 -0400
Olav Woelfelschneider <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> There's an old Spea board in my server featuring an S3 868 Chip.
>
> Too bad the BIOS does not do Vesa 2, so I fear the vesafb is out of question
> for me?
>
> Any chances to get the penguin?
>
> Can I swap in a BIOS of another manufacturer, as long as its S3 868?
> EPROM programmer available.
There's a patch for the vesa-fb code at http://www.colonel-panic.com. It
works with S3 chipsets (worked with my Stealth 64).
--
Regards,
Modemch
------------------------------
Crossposted-To: comp.os.linux.m68k,sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.misc
From: Wolfgang Denk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Embedded Linux Question
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 08:17:40 GMT
"Sarlock T." <sarlock@no!spam.twcny.rr.com> writes:
>Any idea where I can find good information on this particular product?
The hardware is by TQ Systems, see for
http://www.tqs.de/HTM_Files/TQM8xx_Serie.htm
I have ported both the real-time Unix LynxOS (see www.lynx.com) and
Linux 2.2.5 to these boards (see www.denx.de).
>Wolfgang Denk wrote in message ...
>>Another option instead of an Intel x86 architecture is to go with a
>>Motorola Embedded Controller, for instance one of the MPC8xx CPUs.
>>
>>The smallest "board" I could lay hands on so far is just 44 mm x 54
>>mm (1.7" x 2.1"), a bit smaller than half a credit card. It has up to
>>64 MB RAM, 8 MB FLASH, 2 x RS232, parallel port, TP ethernet.
>>
>>And yes, I have Linux (2.2.5) running on it...
Wolfgang
--
Software Engineering: Embedded and Realtime Systems, Embedded Linux
Phone: (+49)-8142-4596-87 Fax: -88 Home: -86 Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
A verbal contract isn't worth the paper it's written on.
-- Samuel Goldwyn
------------------------------
From: Shai Ayal <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [printer drivers]
Date: 21 Jun 1999 11:30:51 GMT
Glen Presho wrote:
>
> Does anyone know of Lexmark printer drivers for Linux? I have a 7000
that
> I'd really like to use.
>
> -TIA
have a look at this
http://bimbo.fjfi.cvut.cz/~paluch/l7kdriver/
Shai
================== Posted via SearchLinux ==================
http://www.searchlinux.com
------------------------------
From: John Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: RAID-1 and 2.2.9 revisited
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 11:32:34 GMT
John Hughes wrote:
>
> John Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > >
> > > I'm currently installing a RAID 1(hardware) system with 2 mirrored 9GB
> > > SCSI drives and a 4GB IDE sytem disk.
> > > I have simple question - what's the most appropriate partitionig sheme
> > > for a web server? Why I shouldn't put the swap on the RAID drives?
> > >
> >
> > Ummm as far as "why..." Do you really need to mirror you swap space?
>
> Umm... Of course you do?
>
> The whole point of mirroring is to let you keep running even if a disk
> dies.
>
As another poster stated...good point...I hadn't thought about that...
Along the same line... system gurus - since many Linux installations
typically have multiple swap partitions residing on different disks, and
the kernel has the ability to stripe the swap partitions and the md
driver has mirroring capability, would it be feasible/reasonable to have
an option for "high availability" that would do a Raid 1+0 on multiple
swap partitions, instead of just striping as is currently done?
John
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Wez Furlong)
Subject: Re: SCSI CDDA Commands
Date: 21 Jun 1999 12:52:37 GMT
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
] Quoted from: Andrew Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
] Date: Thu, 17 Jun 1999 17:11:28 +0100
>Unfortunately I need the info for Windows 95/98/NT not for Linux which is
>why I can't really use Linux software. I basically need to get the info for
>using Audio Extraction from all SCSI drives so that I can write something
>for windows.
>
>Any help? Thanks for the previous posting by the way.
Consider using the Win ASPI layer; you can then get at the data from any
CD-Rom supported by ASPI, including IDE and SCSI drives.
I can't remember the URL, but search for BladeEnc (an mp3 encoding DLL),
and look on the web site for programs that use it - one of them is
called akrip (I think) and comes with full source for grabbing cdda via
ASPI.
Hope this helps.
--
Wez Furlong Undergrad - Electronic Systems Engineering
http://www.twinklestar.demon.co.uk
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Crossposted-To: comp.os.misc
Subject: Re: Microkernel?
Date: 21 Jun 1999 09:26:50 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Paolo Torelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I've been wondering for some time on...
>what EXACTLY is a microkernel? Or, better, what it DOES do?
>Not memory management, it's external. Nor scheduling. Neither I/O. They
>all are external modules. Any help on this?
Paolo, find a book of Uresh Vahalia ("UNIX Internals - The New Frontiers").
It is very well-written and it covers microkernel-related stuff too.
Short answer: it provides synchronisation and message-passing to upper
layers. Read the book (and see references in it - there is a lot of fine
stuff).
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro)
Subject: Re: mounting ftp/http
Date: 21 Jun 1999 09:47:50 -0400
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Alex Rhomberg <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Alexander Viro wrote:
>> With FTP you can get something resembling a filesystem with podfuk and
>> friends - userspace server that looks like Venus for the kernel and
>> does mirror-on-demand work talking with the external FTP servers.
>
>I use alex server for anonymous FTP access. I can mount the alex server
>via NFS and then access files over FTP with normal shell commands. No
>additional tools needed, that's the UNIX way :-)
CODA is not worse than NFS and IMHO is better tool here. You can write
NFS/FTP proxy, indeed, but then you'll have to duplicate all caching.
CODA has the support for caching and disconnected operations. No additional
tools, just more suitable protocol.
--
"You're one of those condescending Unix computer users!"
"Here's a nickel, kid. Get yourself a better computer" - Dilbert.
------------------------------
From: Paolo Torelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 13:49:52 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
"Vladimir Z. Nuri" wrote:
> I asked you once already.. how am I out of line on this thread?
> I will be happy to apologize for anything I posted that was
> "over the line".. let see if all the flameurs ever offer a similar
> money back guarantee<g>
I'll try to make myself clear.
MY target is to gather informations, help, suggestions, critics,
eventually finding people that can actually help building the project
better and faster. My hope is that all possible flaws in the project can
be discovered and corrected before being too late. My goal is to gain
consensus and blesses from a wide area of people, possibly
programmers/designers/whatever so that the project can count on a base
to build up. This is what I'd like to do.
Now, what have you done so far? I came and read a couple of messages
(the earlier were expired), and my impression was that you did all the
possible to turn people against the project. What I saw were people
saying their opinion and their suggestions, noticing flaws in your
messages, and I also say you replying to those same messages with an
such an attitude! Do you believe you did well in your efforts? I tried
to put on-board an essay which could possibly give better results, and I
was people flaming me because of what you said before. Now, how can
possibly someone have faith in a project when its members are against
the whole world? And my message in which I pointed you what you were
doing bad should have been enough for you to understand.
'nuff said.
> I see the truth!! I have feelings!! I hape the courage to
> live in this world and post in this evil flamewar, hehehe
Watch your tongue, you heretic! (whoah! :)
--
[=-----------------------Technolord-the-Hellraiser----------------------=]
To those who can see the truth to those who can still have
feelings
to those who still have the courage to live in this evil world.
.no.regrets.
------------------------------
From: Paolo Torelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: comp.os.misc
Subject: Microkernel?
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 15:09:43 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I've been wondering for some time on...
what EXACTLY is a microkernel? Or, better, what it DOES do?
Not memory management, it's external. Nor scheduling. Neither I/O. They
all are external modules. Any help on this?
--
[=-----------------------Technolord-the-Hellraiser----------------------=]
To those who can see the truth to those who can still have
feelings
to those who still have the courage to live in this evil world.
.no.regrets.
------------------------------
From: "Selious" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Ultimate OS
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 15:54:45 +0200
Reply-To: "Selious" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Linux with netscape as GUI.
Than it start crashing again !!
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 21 Jun 1999 14:31:50 GMT
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 08:53:44 GMT, Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>yes, Unix clearly epitomizes the
>sort of "real men don't design, they just start hacking"
>charade you allude to above.
As compared to what, hardware?
--
Ben
"The world is conspiring in your favor." -- de la Vega
------------------------------
From: Jun Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: help with SAMBA pwds
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 12:00:45 -0300
Are you using NT 4.0? If so, your password sent to Linux server is encrypted.
You need to disable this option in order to send plain text passwds to your
Linux server. To do this, in your NT, run regedt32 and go through all the
following:
HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE
SYSTEM
CurrentControlSet
Services
Rdr
Parameters
and add the following line there:
EnablePlainTextPasswork : REG_DWORD : 0x1
I solved my a similarpasswd problem when I use SAMBA to connect my NT to a
sgi server.
"..Luca T.." wrote:
> Hi,
> i'm trying to set up a linux server in my office, using SAMBA, to connect 4
> windows boxes and to provide them the internet access. I setted up the
> smb.conf and also the windows boxes. These ones recognize the server
> (because when i shut the server down a message like that appears "unable to
> locate a server for the domain ecc. ecc.") but the password seems to be
> wrong.
> Now i used the same names, the same group of my linux users and i also
> synchronized the smb and linux passwords.
> I read in some newsgroups that there may be some prblems with the windows
> registrers but i really don't know where the problem may be, also because i
> made an error installing linux and i started the NIS service without setting
> it out without knowing how to disable it and if it may cause problems with
> samba.
>
> Thanx
>
> Luca Tamburrano (webmaster)
------------------------------
From: Michele <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Problem!
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 15:43:18 +0200
Hi there,
I have a big problem which i can't figure it out.I have made a program
running under linux v.2.0.27 that acts as a client for a server programs
that runs over the same machine.It is designed as a main loop that never
exits and beyond sending messages to the server,uses the /dev/mem to
access the memory below 1M.It works fine for some days but suddenly it
stops running(disappear!!) and I don't have any clue about the reason
why.Is there a way to keep track of what has happened to it?Is there the
possibility that the linux kills the program for some reasons?I know
that informations I am giving aren't of such help but any suggestions
are kindly accepted.
Thanks
Michele
------------------------------
From: Paolo Torelli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Mainframes, Filesystems, Databases... Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 1999 14:50:42 +0200
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
void wrote:
> To get to the point, Terry Lambert suggested exporting the dependency
> mechanism to userland in such a way that applications could register
> dependencies themselves, getting the same kinds of transactional
> guarantees that soft updates provides for the filesystem's own
> structures. I never did see a proposed API from Lambert, though that
> doesn't necessarily mean he never published one.
something like "fwrite(char *,int,int,FILE*,int priority)", where writes
within the different priorities are sorted but not necessarily between
the same priority??
--
[=-----------------------Technolord-the-Hellraiser----------------------=]
To those who can see the truth to those who can still have
feelings
to those who still have the courage to live in this evil world.
.no.regrets.
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (void)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 21 Jun 1999 15:41:05 GMT
On Mon, 21 Jun 1999 09:34:34 GMT, Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>how many programmers can dance on the head of a pin?
Clearly a red herring, since most programmers can't dance.
--
Ben
"The world is conspiring in your favor." -- de la Vega
------------------------------
From: Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: Need for a 128-bit (Unix or other) OS?
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 16:04:51 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Paul Hantom wrote:
>
> I am looking for any arguments (for and against), links, etc., about the need
> for a 128-bit Operating System.
>
> Even though the moves of various OSs from 8-16-32-64 were rather obvious they
> generated a lot of lame--especially in retrospect--argument. However, to me, it
> isn't that obvious why one would need to address more than 64 bits of memory any
> time soon. Am I naive?
>
> 128 bit hardware is one thing; a 128 bit OS quite another. And of course one
> can have a 128 bit file system with a 64 bit OS. Am I right in assuming that
> the main definition of the "bitness" of an OS is the size its address space?
Pretty much.
There are lots of pieces of data that an OS gets given by an application
when the app needs something done. Some of that data will be 8-bit, some
will be 16-bit, some will be 32-bit, etc...
An OS can no longer be given a class label by the number of bits it
accepts as it's data, because on todays machines, the processing of
larger peices of data is easy. This means that whenever a peice of
128-bit data is needed, an OS should/can fulfill the request. Some times
this will need a small bit of code to fake it because the hardware
doesn't support it, sometimes you'll need to put that code into your
application yourself, but the operating system still supports it.
The phrase "32-bit operating system for intel processors" just means it
takes advantage of intel finally catching up with the rest of the
computing world.
Any measure of bittage on any other platform is utterly meaningless
(except where it notes a reduction in explicit limitations).
=====
On your point that it isn't obvious why anyone would want to address
more than 64 bits of memory any time soon. There is *never* any reason
for an OS to limit this deliberately (when CPU's were slow there was a
very *good* reason). If the hardware supports it, the OS should not
explicitly deny it.
--
Tristan Wibberley
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Aki M Laukkanen)
Subject: Re: v2.3.7 does not compile, (errors attached :-)
Date: 21 Jun 1999 16:37:32 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Greg de Freitas wrote:
>..well, the final 2.3.7 was _NOT_ described as _DANGEROUS_ ;-)
>I agree, it never gets a chance to do any damage, so it isn't !
You should really read linux-kernel if you want to follow development
kernels.
Ingo Molnar writes:
> Folks,
>
> Compiling of fat blows up.
the lowlevel API from the kernel-internal pagecache to filesystems has
changed in an incompatible way in 2.3.7, to support the new pagecache and
to scale better on SMP. All 'not yet converted' filesystems break safely
at compilation time, instead of crashing and/or corrupting files. If you
still want to try 2.3.7 then you'll have compile a kernel with turned off
dosfs.
--
D.
------------------------------
From: Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: using C++ for linux device drivers
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 17:08:56 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Nathan Myers wrote:
>
> John Burton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >Tristan Wibberley wrote in message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> >> Don't use normal new syntax.
> >
> >Why not, as long as you override the global new/free to call kmalloc
> >and kfree they should be fine.
>
> They have different semantics. Some things are best not hidden,
> and kernel memory management is one such. Placement new is
> sufficient to construct objects, but check for a null result
> from kmalloc first.
>
> >> Only use built in types which are also found in C.
> >
> >Why? You wouldn't want to pass a bool to the c part of the kernel but
> >why not use one in your own code?
>
> There's nothing wrong with using bool. Floating-point is forbidden
> for other reasons anyway. Reference types are fine within your own
> code.
>
> >> Use virtual methods as little as possible (ie, don't) - they'll lead to
> >>bugs.
> >
> >Why would they lead to bugs? If you don't use virtual methods there
> >is little point to using c++.
>
> The main value of C++ for kernel work, particularly for a single
> module, is its template mechanism. Even restricting yourself to
> inline templates, they provide enormous expressive power.
>
> Virtual functions are used in C++ in cases where in C you would use
> a table of function pointers. They do not "lead to bugs", they
> prevent the kind of bugs you find in such usage in C.
My thinking was erring on the side of caution. When using virtual
inheritance, there is no guarantee on what the data structures will be.
Thus, for the sake of caution only, I advised not to use them in a
kernel where all data structures really ought to be guaranteed to be
constistent with the rest of the kernel (so it'd be totally safe if the
whole kernel used vitual functions instead of the current C arrays of
function pointers, and compiled with compatible linkage).
On the use of other data types, I was again just erring on the side of
caution (like with the choose limited linkage for behaviour guarantees
idea). I will concede that this one is probably safe, provided that you
have a guarantee of how the data will be represented and operated on.
Note, the source code to, say, libg++ is *no* guarantee, only the ISO
standard ARM document is.
My earlier post was intended as cautious advice, and I don't apologise
for being cautious WRT the kernel.
--
Tristan Wibberley
------------------------------
From: Tristan Wibberley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: using C++ for linux device drivers
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 1999 17:23:42 +0100
Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Frank Sweetser wrote:
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Nathan Myers) writes:
>
> > Frank Sweetser <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >Justin Vallon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Alexander Viro) writes:
> > >> > In article <7kdqj9$l1o$[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >> > > I am working a sound driver for linux (I will probably use OSS).I
> > >> > >am planning to use C++, instead of C.
> > >>
> > >> void *operator new(size_t s) { return malloc(s); /* kmalloc, etc */ }
> > >> void operator delete(void *p) { free(p); }
> > >
> > >...which is a higher-overhead version of
> > >
> > >#define new((x)) malloc((x))
> > >#define delete((x)) free((x))
> >
> > Frank, you are confused beyond salvation on this point.
> > Best drop it.
>
> exactly how am i confused? (honest question, i'm not trying to flame...)
> the only overhead to which i was referring is the overhead of calling a
> function that does nothing but call the function you really want. and yes,
> you do want to worry about that kind of optimization in the kernel code at
> times. note that this will not simply be inlined by the compiler in the
> case of the kernel unless you tell it to.
>
> > >> Compile with -nostdinc++ -fno-exceptions.
> > >>
> > >> Static constructors may need a C++ link phase, or you could warn that
> > >> C++ static constructors will not be executed.
> > >
> > >don't forget about name mangling, call by reference, the whole
> > >private/public/protected mess...
> >
> > Name mangling is dealt with by 'extern "C"'.
>
> hrm... IIRC, there were some issues that came up with the last time this
> matter got hashed out regarding exporting symbols from C++ code - ie, going
> the other way. i may be misremembering, though...
>
> > Call-by-reference is a non-issue; no kernel function or callback uses it.
>
> another feature of C++ that can't be used.
>
> > There is no such thing as a "private/public/protected" mess.
> > Those keywords have no effect on the emitted object code.
>
> another feature of C++ that can't be used.
>
> > That they are keywords at all might break some kernel headers.
>
> i guess my biggest point here is - once you take away all of the extra
> feautures that won't work or don't make sense in the kernel context, what
> advantages does C++ realy have for writing a kernel module?
The syntax is much neater (and neat code is absolutely *vital*, as I've
seen you say before). This is the only reason I would use C++ in the
kernel unless the whole kernel used C++, where I would use plenty of
virtual functions. Of course I would want more compiler flags to choose
the way virtual functions are implemented.
Virtual functions are much nicer (from a maintainence point of view)
than tables of C function pointers (even though the generated machine
code can be made identical).
--
Tristan Wibberley
------------------------------
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Terry Murphy)
Crossposted-To: alt.os.linux,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.os.misc,comp.unix.advocacy
Subject: Re: TAO: the ultimate OS
Date: 21 Jun 1999 17:25:52 GMT
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Vladimir Z. Nuri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>hi TM.. try not to agree with me so much.. I'm a crackpot, remember? hahaha
If it's not for people like you, the current software trend will remain
the same, something which scares the droppings out of me. The trend I
see, with Windows 2000 apparently slated to be very Unix-like, and
MacOS going Unix, is something which I don't like the implications of...
>I think that's a very interesting line of thinking, I hadn't
>considered that idea. yes, Unix clearly epitomizes the
>sort of "real men don't design, they just start hacking"
>charade you allude to above.
The "rapid prototyping" philosphy is very tightly ingrained into
Unix, into the doucmentation, into the way the tools are used,
and into the tools itself. This is something, which, IMHO, we
need to get very far from.
>I most agree but beg to differ. I agree that window/unix are somewhat
>pathetic given 30 years of software/OS evolution.
>but software design is arguably
>more fundamentally complex than chip design. (not to start a flamewar
>on this subject, hopefully)..
Oh, I wholeheartedly agree that a sophisticated software system is more
complex than a chip (a CPU). If it's a good comparison, Windows NT has
many times more lines of code than either of the CPU's it runs on has
logic transitors. Also, a CPU has a very small interface (the ISA) but
software doesn't (for example, an operating system has API's for both
system services and library routines, plus user interfaces for the
utilities). Software is significantly more difficult to test,
especially methodically.
But I guess that was my point, which I didn't state explicitly:
DESPITE software engineering being more complex than chip design
and many other engineering disciplines, it is treated in a much
less professional/methodical manner than the other engineering
disciplines.
>actually, the reason I propose a totally object oriented OS is my opinion
>that the software industry has still yet to discover the software
>equivalent of a "chip cell".. i.e. a standardized building block.
>objects fit the bill imho (or some "component" entity
>similar to objects), but the software industry has still not
>fully realized that .. and the lack of an OS based on objects,
>or the hostility directed toward creating one, is further evidence..
>
>what I am saying is that the software industry has to find
>a "standard object" or "standard black box" that truly is
>used as such at all levels in the design, not just at one
>level or another. it has discovered object but is not yet
>at the point of unification, at which point the entire
>OS will be object oriented.
I do, of course, hope that this is the future of operating systems,
and software in general. Taking all of the theoretical work on this
and turning it into a product which you can build, however, is an
extremely difficult task, but I wish you the best of luck.
-- Terry
------------------------------
** FOR YOUR REFERENCE **
The service address, to which questions about the list itself and requests
to be added to or deleted from it should be directed, is:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
You can send mail to the entire list (and comp.os.linux.development.system) via:
Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Linux may be obtained via one of these FTP sites:
ftp.funet.fi pub/Linux
tsx-11.mit.edu pub/linux
sunsite.unc.edu pub/Linux
End of Linux-Development-System Digest
******************************
