#61 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 4:27 am
Subject: Opps, I did not expect this ! mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
When I agreed to start the osFree list, translate a few readmes, and more
importantly,
upload a few ZIP files to some ftp sites I did not know I was about to open one
of the best
(or worst) kept secrets in the OS/2 community.
It seems that there is a leak of the OS/2 source code and that lots of people
has it !
When the osFree distro was released some people started to shout "illegal" or
"blody murder"
and tried to prove their point by referencing to the leaked source "everyone"
knows about.
Thats a really nice way to bite onself in the tail
Others screamed, "I have it but I dont feel guilty since I did not tell others".
Yet some people screamed, "I will not use illegal stuff shame on you".
Now it turns out that many people has this leaked code but have kept their
posession of it more or less secret.
Well, to all the people that screamed "I will not use illegal stuff shame on
you".
Its not impossible that the developer of your favorite OS/2 application has this
code and may even have peeked into it/copied stuff to write their application.
I do some software developing myself. I feel a bit betrayed that so many
other people have this source and not me. Why them and not me ?
Are they better since they keep their possession secret ?
Now what should the OS/2 community do ? Deny any knowledge of the source
(for some that is to late ) and blame it all on the osFree developers ?
Or should we admit the facts and admit to ourselves that everything is not
just good or bad ?
I dont have the answer, but you should all think long and hard !
Sincerely
JMA
Development and Consulting
John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================
Part 3 - Feb 20 2002
Re: Part 3
#62 From: "pinoozzyid" <pinoozzyid@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:25 am
Subject: Re: Leaked sources pinoozzyid
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:20:34 -0000, pinoozzyid wrote:
>
> >It could be based on the Merlin sources but this are at least 90% the
> >same that MCP2 (remember the M stands for Merlin). The main changes
> >are those of the support of the new file system and it's interfaces,
> >that were developed to support another feature that never came to be
> >(so far at least).
> >
> While PM and WPS are probably mostly unchanged there are LOTS
> of changes in the kernel and the driver subsystems.
>
> The kernel, I'm told was rewritten between Warp 4 and Aurora not
> only to add new thing but they moved lots of source to VisualAge
> C++ from older tools (asm or IBMC ?).
>
> TCPIP is probably almost entierly rewritten and many drivers are
> new. Ofcource JFS/LVM is just a recompile (to pharaphrase people
> in this list who "know" how osFree was build).
>
> So saying that Warp 4 and Aurora is almost the same is unfair to
> the work IBM put into it.
>
> Btw, thanks for a sound view of all this. I wish more people would
> see possibilities in an opensource OS/2 system and stop debating
> where the thing released now came from.
>
>
John, I just realized (I'm bad with names) you had a page, Warp X or
something, some years ago, whatever happened to it?, it was a fun
page, filled with rumors and tips about the things to expect from IBM.
Leonardo Pino
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:25 am
Subject: Re: Leaked sources pinoozzyid
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
> On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 18:20:34 -0000, pinoozzyid wrote:
>
> >It could be based on the Merlin sources but this are at least 90% the
> >same that MCP2 (remember the M stands for Merlin). The main changes
> >are those of the support of the new file system and it's interfaces,
> >that were developed to support another feature that never came to be
> >(so far at least).
> >
> While PM and WPS are probably mostly unchanged there are LOTS
> of changes in the kernel and the driver subsystems.
>
> The kernel, I'm told was rewritten between Warp 4 and Aurora not
> only to add new thing but they moved lots of source to VisualAge
> C++ from older tools (asm or IBMC ?).
>
> TCPIP is probably almost entierly rewritten and many drivers are
> new. Ofcource JFS/LVM is just a recompile (to pharaphrase people
> in this list who "know" how osFree was build).
>
> So saying that Warp 4 and Aurora is almost the same is unfair to
> the work IBM put into it.
>
> Btw, thanks for a sound view of all this. I wish more people would
> see possibilities in an opensource OS/2 system and stop debating
> where the thing released now came from.
>
>
John, I just realized (I'm bad with names) you had a page, Warp X or
something, some years ago, whatever happened to it?, it was a fun
page, filled with rumors and tips about the things to expect from IBM.
Leonardo Pino
Re: Part 3
#63 From: "Marat Khalili" <marat_khalili@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 8:47 am
Subject: Well maratcolumn1
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
1. I'll ignore this sources story until someone will finally apper and state
clearly "I am involved
We took this sources from bla-bla-bla We thought bla-bla-bla" etc.
2. They have definitely attracted a lot of public - let us use it for good.
Most of us are
programmers ready to do something - please *stay online* for some time. Leaked
sources do
not matter, our community does.
3. We'll have to decide what do we really need to keep of OS/2: kernel, driver
base , CPI
programs, PM, WPS, PM programs, REXX-enabled shell, something else?
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 8:47 am
Subject: Well maratcolumn1
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
1. I'll ignore this sources story until someone will finally apper and state
clearly "I am involved
We took this sources from bla-bla-bla We thought bla-bla-bla" etc.
2. They have definitely attracted a lot of public - let us use it for good.
Most of us are
programmers ready to do something - please *stay online* for some time. Leaked
sources do
not matter, our community does.
3. We'll have to decide what do we really need to keep of OS/2: kernel, driver
base , CPI
programs, PM, WPS, PM programs, REXX-enabled shell, something else?
Re: Part 3
#64 From: "Bartosz Tomasik (Bart/2)" <bart2@...>
Date: Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:51 am
Subject: Re: Where can it be downloaded? ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 01:03:23 -0000, carlossuss wrote:
>I see it is no longer available on Hobbes.
I've mirrored it at http://www.asua.org.pl/ftp/osFree/
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Date: Thu Feb 21, 2002 8:51 am
Subject: Re: Where can it be downloaded? ihsiatko
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 01:03:23 -0000, carlossuss wrote:
>I see it is no longer available on Hobbes.
I've mirrored it at http://www.asua.org.pl/ftp/osFree/
-------------------------------------------------
Bart/2 irc:Ihsahn Bart2@... UIN:50890586
Asu'a Programmers Group http://www.asua.org.pl
TeamOS/2 Polska http://www.teamos2.org.pl
Re: Part 3
#65 From: Kris Steenhaut <kris.steenhaut@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 10:26 am
Subject: Re: My take on this.. krissteenhaut
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
JMA schreef:
>
> What I meant to say is that having copyrighted work in your possesion
Again, copyrighting isn't issue, as it is about source code. Source code can be
patented in the US and Japan, but
not in Europe (EG) let alone Russia.
More about. at:
http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/papri/eubsa-swpat0202/
http://www.freepatents.org/
Bottom line, you can't infringe "software patent" rights in Europe as this is a
non existent item.
(bsa is working on it, but that's quite another matter).
So, albeit it's byond my capabilities, I'm intitled to fabricate and sell a file
system exactly the same as hpfs
and hpfs386 in Europe and Russia. However, perhaps I wouldn't be entitled to
call it "hpfs*", as hpfs* could be a
protected trade mark. Not even sure about the latter.
Bottom line: software patents only are valid in the States and Japan. They don't
have to care about that in
Russia, and not even in Europe so far.
--
Groeten uit Gent,
Kris
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 10:26 am
Subject: Re: My take on this.. krissteenhaut
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
JMA schreef:
>
> What I meant to say is that having copyrighted work in your possesion
Again, copyrighting isn't issue, as it is about source code. Source code can be
patented in the US and Japan, but
not in Europe (EG) let alone Russia.
More about. at:
http://swpat.ffii.org/vreji/papri/eubsa-swpat0202/
http://www.freepatents.org/
Bottom line, you can't infringe "software patent" rights in Europe as this is a
non existent item.
(bsa is working on it, but that's quite another matter).
So, albeit it's byond my capabilities, I'm intitled to fabricate and sell a file
system exactly the same as hpfs
and hpfs386 in Europe and Russia. However, perhaps I wouldn't be entitled to
call it "hpfs*", as hpfs* could be a
protected trade mark. Not even sure about the latter.
Bottom line: software patents only are valid in the States and Japan. They don't
have to care about that in
Russia, and not even in Europe so far.
--
Groeten uit Gent,
Kris
Re: Part 3
#66 From: "kadzsol" <kadzsol@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:20 pm
Subject: Re: Opps, I did not expect this ! kadzsol
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
>
> It seems that there is a leak of the OS/2 source code and that lots
of people has it !
I still do not believe it. Please upload it to the file section to
convince me.
Zs
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:20 pm
Subject: Re: Opps, I did not expect this ! kadzsol
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
--- In osFree@y..., "JMA" <mail@j...> wrote:
>
> It seems that there is a leak of the OS/2 source code and that lots
of people has it !
I still do not believe it. Please upload it to the file section to
convince me.
Zs
Re: Part 3
#67 From: "poldi42" <poldi42@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:46 pm
Subject: what is and what could be poldi42
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
for a moment, let be put legal issues aside. I do know neither the
facts nor am I qualified to judge them if I knew.
my question right now is: if we *had* the sourcees neccessary to build
a basic OS* like the distributed one, how usefull would it be?
my first impression yesterday was like some others':
- a 1:1 clone would be less interesting than a ground-up new build
based on more recent kernel-technologies
- it would inherit all limitations of the original (presumably from
1999 or before)
- it is by far not a complete usable OS, missing for example PM/WSP et c.
- the driver situation for one would be the same or worse than now for
a clone.
- as such, why bother?
thinking about it, I have my mind made up a little different now. some
ideas:
- there are a lot more parts of OS/2 lying legally around:
* DDTK parts,
* some other toolkits might provide something (mmtk, ...)
* LVM, BootManager and JFS are Open Source
* SOM(2.0) as a base for re-implementing the WPS is available
* SAMBA as a networking stack is available Open Source
* (small) parts of the WPS got rewritten for XWP
* AFAIK there is/was a free TCP/IP stack for OS/2 from pre-Warp
times when you had to buy TCP/IP as a seperate product from IBM.
- would the base system as seen on hobbes, FAT16, JFS and TCP/IP
really be available, a usable system could indeed be gathered. using
links, lynx or elink you could provide a ready-to-surf textmode system.
- using XFee86 on it there would be instant access to a lot of
graphical software...
- please consider what Serenety could have done better concerning eCS,
if they had the sources from IBM (and the manpower to do something
with it) what comes instantly to my mind is OS/2s/eCS' historically
grown directory-structure that could have been changed only with
modificacions to many hard-coded parts of OS/2s subsystems...
this is IMHO one basic question if it come to the usefullness of such
a clone: how much better could a distribution like eCS have been made
with full access to the OS' sources? IMHO a lot.
another point that relates to the clone vs. new design question would
be: there will no new designed one. prove: there is none by now. I was
listening to the freeos ml untill beginning of 2000, when the
arguments were completing nice circles and it got boring...
so, as said, legal issueas asside, I'd like to change my former
oppinion and say: this would be technically and strategically
interesting and good.
regards,
Carsten
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:46 pm
Subject: what is and what could be poldi42
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
for a moment, let be put legal issues aside. I do know neither the
facts nor am I qualified to judge them if I knew.
my question right now is: if we *had* the sourcees neccessary to build
a basic OS* like the distributed one, how usefull would it be?
my first impression yesterday was like some others':
- a 1:1 clone would be less interesting than a ground-up new build
based on more recent kernel-technologies
- it would inherit all limitations of the original (presumably from
1999 or before)
- it is by far not a complete usable OS, missing for example PM/WSP et c.
- the driver situation for one would be the same or worse than now for
a clone.
- as such, why bother?
thinking about it, I have my mind made up a little different now. some
ideas:
- there are a lot more parts of OS/2 lying legally around:
* DDTK parts,
* some other toolkits might provide something (mmtk, ...)
* LVM, BootManager and JFS are Open Source
* SOM(2.0) as a base for re-implementing the WPS is available
* SAMBA as a networking stack is available Open Source
* (small) parts of the WPS got rewritten for XWP
* AFAIK there is/was a free TCP/IP stack for OS/2 from pre-Warp
times when you had to buy TCP/IP as a seperate product from IBM.
- would the base system as seen on hobbes, FAT16, JFS and TCP/IP
really be available, a usable system could indeed be gathered. using
links, lynx or elink you could provide a ready-to-surf textmode system.
- using XFee86 on it there would be instant access to a lot of
graphical software...
- please consider what Serenety could have done better concerning eCS,
if they had the sources from IBM (and the manpower to do something
with it) what comes instantly to my mind is OS/2s/eCS' historically
grown directory-structure that could have been changed only with
modificacions to many hard-coded parts of OS/2s subsystems...
this is IMHO one basic question if it come to the usefullness of such
a clone: how much better could a distribution like eCS have been made
with full access to the OS' sources? IMHO a lot.
another point that relates to the clone vs. new design question would
be: there will no new designed one. prove: there is none by now. I was
listening to the freeos ml untill beginning of 2000, when the
arguments were completing nice circles and it got boring...
so, as said, legal issueas asside, I'd like to change my former
oppinion and say: this would be technically and strategically
interesting and good.
regards,
Carsten
Re: Part 3
#68 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: Well criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi all,
> 1. I'll ignore this sources story until someone will finally apper and state
clearly "I am involved
> We took this sources from bla-bla-bla We thought bla-bla-bla" etc.
>
> 2. They have definitely attracted a lot of public - let us use it for good.
Most of us are
> programmers ready to do something - please *stay online* for some time. Leaked
sources do
> not matter, our community does.
I totally agree. This is a "bomb" that attracted a lot of what remains
of the OS/2 community. Last time I looked, there were already 90+
subscribers after a few hours from the announcement.
Let's put ourselves to work, all together. Let's do SOMETHING. It
doesn't matter if people don't agree with the current binary, if we're
enough (and enough motivated) we can do it the way we want.
Bye
Cris
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 12:58 pm
Subject: Re: Well criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi all,
> 1. I'll ignore this sources story until someone will finally apper and state
clearly "I am involved
> We took this sources from bla-bla-bla We thought bla-bla-bla" etc.
>
> 2. They have definitely attracted a lot of public - let us use it for good.
Most of us are
> programmers ready to do something - please *stay online* for some time. Leaked
sources do
> not matter, our community does.
I totally agree. This is a "bomb" that attracted a lot of what remains
of the OS/2 community. Last time I looked, there were already 90+
subscribers after a few hours from the announcement.
Let's put ourselves to work, all together. Let's do SOMETHING. It
doesn't matter if people don't agree with the current binary, if we're
enough (and enough motivated) we can do it the way we want.
Bye
Cris
Re: Part 3
#69 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 1:10 pm
Subject: Re: what is and what could be criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi Carsten,
> thinking about it, I have my mind made up a little different now. some
> ideas:
> - there are a lot more parts of OS/2 lying legally around:
(...)
> * AFAIK there is/was a free TCP/IP stack for OS/2 from pre-Warp
> times when you had to buy TCP/IP as a seperate product from IBM.
mmhh... IIRC that was supposed to work on top of the "internet kit" (I
don't remember the exact name anymore) that was freely distributed for
dial-up access on Warp 3. That kit already implemented the stack.
Nonetheless, there are som many open TCP/IP implementations that I think
this part could be relatively easily replaced. Sure, the current 4.3
stack is a GOOD one, and I don't know how much work would it take to
clone it... on the other hand, it is based on the BSD stack, which is
opensource.
Regarding WPS, don't forget Ulrich (XWP author) has recently declared
his ultimate goal is to completely rewrite the WPS code. Sure, this is a
BIG work.
(...)
> this is IMHO one basic question if it come to the usefullness of such
> a clone: how much better could a distribution like eCS have been made
> with full access to the OS' sources? IMHO a lot.
(...)
> so, as said, legal issueas asside, I'd like to change my former
> oppinion and say: this would be technically and strategically
> interesting and good.
I'm very happy to finally hear a positive / constructive criticism. Like
many others on this list, I really want to see something happen... don't
want to install this or that Linux distro. I want to keep OS/2 if it is
possible.
My 2 cents..
Bye
Cris
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 1:10 pm
Subject: Re: what is and what could be criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
Hi Carsten,
> thinking about it, I have my mind made up a little different now. some
> ideas:
> - there are a lot more parts of OS/2 lying legally around:
(...)
> * AFAIK there is/was a free TCP/IP stack for OS/2 from pre-Warp
> times when you had to buy TCP/IP as a seperate product from IBM.
mmhh... IIRC that was supposed to work on top of the "internet kit" (I
don't remember the exact name anymore) that was freely distributed for
dial-up access on Warp 3. That kit already implemented the stack.
Nonetheless, there are som many open TCP/IP implementations that I think
this part could be relatively easily replaced. Sure, the current 4.3
stack is a GOOD one, and I don't know how much work would it take to
clone it... on the other hand, it is based on the BSD stack, which is
opensource.
Regarding WPS, don't forget Ulrich (XWP author) has recently declared
his ultimate goal is to completely rewrite the WPS code. Sure, this is a
BIG work.
(...)
> this is IMHO one basic question if it come to the usefullness of such
> a clone: how much better could a distribution like eCS have been made
> with full access to the OS' sources? IMHO a lot.
(...)
> so, as said, legal issueas asside, I'd like to change my former
> oppinion and say: this would be technically and strategically
> interesting and good.
I'm very happy to finally hear a positive / constructive criticism. Like
many others on this list, I really want to see something happen... don't
want to install this or that Linux distro. I want to keep OS/2 if it is
possible.
My 2 cents..
Bye
Cris
Re: Part 3
#70 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 1:25 pm
Subject: Re: building a kernel from scratch or not mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 21:46:12 -0300 (EST), Perry Werneck wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 00:42:24 +0100, JMA wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>> I agree about this. *If* the idea is to wrote a real free OS based on OS/2
the best way is writing a
>>>brand new kernel supporting the same APIs of the original one and, maybee,
some new ones. (-:
>>Me to, and most people in the FreeOS list.
>>Now, what happened there ?
>
> Well. I never joined the FreeOS list and I'm new on this one but seens like
this list isn't that I
>expected. Is there any project of building a new kernel? I Think I can help in
some parts but I don't have
>skills to the worst part (memory management and task scheduling) .
>
There is no project I know about (except osFree) that is *doing* anything to
create an opensource OS/2
clone (I know of no closedsource either .
Building a new kernel is not a problem. There are lots of opensource kernels
floating around than one
could use. There is even a project called oskit that has relativly complete unix
alike kernel that anyone
can get and use as a base for their own kernel.
But whats the use of a snazzy futuristic kernel when there are no drivers ?
This may come as a revelation but the driver support for OS/2 is quite good !
The get as good or better there are two kernels to base an osFree on, Windows or
Linux.
Windows is closedsource, the Linux kernel is well not that modern.
So taking super-duper-micro-kernel x from any opensource project will give us a
great kernel but no drivers.
And writing a full set of drivers are MUCH harder than writing a kernel.
Ideally (I will get flamed for this) you should thake the Windows NT/2K/XP
kernel and put a osFree layer
ontop of it. It would give us the best driver support availible and our OS/2
compatible env. ontop.
But windows is closed source and we "dont want to run no stinking windows".
As Michael Necacek said in a message here, "yes, OS/2 has a 16-bit drivers
interface but it work and
there are plenty of drivers".
I'd like you to get in contact with the osFree developers. They have many
thought about how to implement
a kenel and they need manpower. I'll send them an email.
Sincerely
JMA
Development and Consulting
John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 1:25 pm
Subject: Re: building a kernel from scratch or not mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°
On Tue, 19 Feb 2002 21:46:12 -0300 (EST), Perry Werneck wrote:
>On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 00:42:24 +0100, JMA wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>>> I agree about this. *If* the idea is to wrote a real free OS based on OS/2
the best way is writing a
>>>brand new kernel supporting the same APIs of the original one and, maybee,
some new ones. (-:
>>Me to, and most people in the FreeOS list.
>>Now, what happened there ?
>
> Well. I never joined the FreeOS list and I'm new on this one but seens like
this list isn't that I
>expected. Is there any project of building a new kernel? I Think I can help in
some parts but I don't have
>skills to the worst part (memory management and task scheduling) .
>
There is no project I know about (except osFree) that is *doing* anything to
create an opensource OS/2
clone (I know of no closedsource either .
Building a new kernel is not a problem. There are lots of opensource kernels
floating around than one
could use. There is even a project called oskit that has relativly complete unix
alike kernel that anyone
can get and use as a base for their own kernel.
But whats the use of a snazzy futuristic kernel when there are no drivers ?
This may come as a revelation but the driver support for OS/2 is quite good !
The get as good or better there are two kernels to base an osFree on, Windows or
Linux.
Windows is closedsource, the Linux kernel is well not that modern.
So taking super-duper-micro-kernel x from any opensource project will give us a
great kernel but no drivers.
And writing a full set of drivers are MUCH harder than writing a kernel.
Ideally (I will get flamed for this) you should thake the Windows NT/2K/XP
kernel and put a osFree layer
ontop of it. It would give us the best driver support availible and our OS/2
compatible env. ontop.
But windows is closed source and we "dont want to run no stinking windows".
As Michael Necacek said in a message here, "yes, OS/2 has a 16-bit drivers
interface but it work and
there are plenty of drivers".
I'd like you to get in contact with the osFree developers. They have many
thought about how to implement
a kenel and they need manpower. I'll send them an email.
Sincerely
JMA
Development and Consulting
John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================