OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Discussions about osFree boot sequence
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:23 am
firstname: osFree
lastname: admin

Re: OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Post by admin » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:41 pm

Cris



Joined: 04 Apr 2005
Posts: 19
Location: Italy

PostPosted: Mon May 09, 2005 9:53 am Post subject: Reply with quote
KC5TJA wrote: Contrary to popular belief, I still exist.
That's nice to know, Samuel :)
Take your time, there are other things that can be done in parallel.

Thankyou for your efforts!
Bye

Cris
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:23 am
firstname: osFree
lastname: admin

Re: OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Post by admin » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:41 pm

KC5TJA



Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 22
Location: San Diego, California, USA

PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2005 6:14 am Post subject: Reply with quote

Gahh! Why is this so hard for me now?

Anyone who looks at the LEAN specification will very clearly see that it is a trivial filesystem. And, yet, my implementation is coming out rediculously complicated. I'm thoroughly unhappy with it.

To wit, I spent all day today -- over 12 hours of coding -- the software doesn't even *link*. Why? There are just so many undefined functions!! And of course, absolutely no way to really test it at all until *ALL* the pieces are put into place.

I can't understand how such a simple filesystem can be so complex to write. I'm definitely becoming very flustered with this.

At this point, any OS I write next will absolutely NOT have a Unix-like (which includes OS/2 and DOS) filesystem implementation. Instead, it will be virtual address space based, where applications are free to allocate and free space in it, just as they are in core memory. Evil or Very Mad
_________________
Samuel A. Falvo II
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:23 am
firstname: osFree
lastname: admin

Re: OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Post by admin » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:43 pm

Guest







PostPosted: Thu May 19, 2005 10:05 am Post subject: Reply with quote
KC5TJA wrote: At this point, any OS I write next will absolutely NOT have a Unix-like (which includes OS/2 and DOS) filesystem implementation. Instead, it will be virtual address space based, where applications are free to allocate and free space in it, just as they are in core memory. Evil or Very Mad
Heh. And how you will provide access to data for user? By address? ;)

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:23 am
firstname: osFree
lastname: admin

Re: OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Post by admin » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:45 pm

valerius



Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 50
Location: Elizovo, Kamchatka, Russia

PostPosted: Sat May 21, 2005 7:52 am Post subject: Reply with quote
guest wrote: Heh. And how you will provide access to data for user? By address? ;)
As I understand, an author is now writing an Operating System loader, and at the beginning
he wanted to do it as under OS/2 -- with filesystem drivers -- microFSD, miniFSD, and now
it seems that it's too complicated to do it straight way. And, for simplicity, it was decided to
do it a more simpler way -- accessing files by virtual memory addresses, not by a
filesystem, but by a concept of dataspaces (am I right?).
No user interaction is needed at this point, so it is not a question.

An addition: (Possibly, the files can be loaded from the network by tftp protocol,
by using an file system realization from other OS's personality, or by
some other way. It's possible, if using L4 microkernel)
_________________
WBR,
Valery V. Sedletski
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
ICQ Number

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:23 am
firstname: osFree
lastname: admin

Re: OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Post by admin » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:47 pm

KC5TJA



Joined: 02 Apr 2005
Posts: 22
Location: San Diego, California, USA

PostPosted: Tue Jun 14, 2005 5:33 pm Post subject: Reply with quote
Anonymous wrote:
KC5TJA wrote: At this point, any OS I write next will absolutely NOT have a Unix-like (which includes OS/2 and DOS) filesystem implementation. Instead, it will be virtual address space based, where applications are free to allocate and free space in it, just as they are in core memory. Evil or Very Mad
Heh. And how you will provide access to data for user? By address? Wink
By objects. The standard Unix-like API is refactored into a carrier/rider design pattern. The problem now is simply one of time -- I haven't had any time to keep coding consistently. Sad It figures though -- as soon as I start something, something else has to intervene destructively.
_________________
Samuel A. Falvo II
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website

admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1925
Joined: Wed Dec 19, 2018 9:23 am
firstname: osFree
lastname: admin

Re: OS/3 Boot System: Prototype 1

Post by admin » Mon Mar 11, 2019 2:53 pm

prokushev
Site Admin

Administrator
Programming
King

Posts: 0
Registered:
2018-06-07


Joined: 25 Nov 2003
Posts: 100

Posted: Wed Jun 15, 2005 4:09 am Post subject:
KC5TJA wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
KC5TJA wrote: At this point, any OS I write next will absolutely NOT have a Unix-like (which includes OS/2 and DOS) filesystem implementation. Instead, it will be virtual address space based, where applications are free to allocate and free space in it, just as they are in core memory.
Heh. And how you will provide access to data for user? By address?
By objects. The standard Unix-like API is refactored into a carrier/rider design pattern. The problem now is simply one of time -- I haven't had any time to keep coding consistently. It figures though -- as soon as I start something, something else has to intervene destructively.
Well, object filesystem is interesting thing. But now I want to ask about OS2 loader. Have you any progress? Personally I want to say, OS/2 port of scons not ready yet (seems to be some problems with paths parsing).

wbr,
Yuri

Post Reply