#1190 Re: [osFree] Petition at OS/2 World?
Expand Messages
Gregory L. Marx
Feb 24, 2005
Tom Lee Mullins wrote:
>There is some discussion of a petition being
>developed at http://www.os2world.com to get
>IBM to release the source code. The idea is to
>write the petition of open sourcing OS/2 as
>not only potentially profitable to IBM but
>also show that they support open source
>projects while giving OS/2 users what they
>want (continued use of OS/2).
>
>TomLeeM/BigWarpGuy
>
This isn't going to happen due to Microsoft *owning* much of the code to
OS/2.
I think you know this Tom, as it's been
talked/written/argued/haggled/discussed about many, many times.
Now, if this petition were to ask about opening certain *aspects* of the
OS/2 codebase, that's a different story.
GLM
Part 40 - Feb 03 2005
Re: Petition at OS/2 World?
#1191 Re: Petition at OS/2 World?
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Feb 24, 2005
> Tom Lee Mullins wrote:
>
> >There is some discussion of a petition being
> >developed at http://www.os2world.com to get
> >IBM to release the source code. The idea is to
> >write the petition of open sourcing OS/2 as
> >not only potentially profitable to IBM but
> >also show that they support open source
> >projects while giving OS/2 users what they
> >want (continued use of OS/2).
> >
> >TomLeeM/BigWarpGuy
> >
> This isn't going to happen due to
> Microsoft *owning* much of the code to
> OS/2. I think you know this Tom, as it's been
> talked/written/argued/haggled/discussed about
> many, many times.
>
> Now, if this petition were to ask about opening
> certain *aspects* of the
> OS/2 codebase, that's a different story.
>
> GLM
I used IBM's feedback at http://www.ibm.com
to find how much of the OS/2 code is (still
is) owned by Microsoft. I also asked if it
will prevent the release of the OS/2 source
code as open source.
TomLeeM
PS One will never really know if it can be done
if one never tries.
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Feb 24, 2005
> Tom Lee Mullins wrote:
>
> >There is some discussion of a petition being
> >developed at http://www.os2world.com to get
> >IBM to release the source code. The idea is to
> >write the petition of open sourcing OS/2 as
> >not only potentially profitable to IBM but
> >also show that they support open source
> >projects while giving OS/2 users what they
> >want (continued use of OS/2).
> >
> >TomLeeM/BigWarpGuy
> >
> This isn't going to happen due to
> Microsoft *owning* much of the code to
> OS/2. I think you know this Tom, as it's been
> talked/written/argued/haggled/discussed about
> many, many times.
>
> Now, if this petition were to ask about opening
> certain *aspects* of the
> OS/2 codebase, that's a different story.
>
> GLM
I used IBM's feedback at http://www.ibm.com
to find how much of the OS/2 code is (still
is) owned by Microsoft. I also asked if it
will prevent the release of the OS/2 source
code as open source.
TomLeeM
PS One will never really know if it can be done
if one never tries.
Re: [osFree] Petition at OS/2 World?
#1192 Re: [osFree] Petition at OS/2 World?
Expand Messages
Lynn H. Maxson
Feb 24, 2005
I agree. Personally I would shoot for the source for OS/2 for
the PPC, which should have fewer dependencies on M$. It
might just give a boost for those wanting to join the REACTOS
project.
Expand Messages
Lynn H. Maxson
Feb 24, 2005
I agree. Personally I would shoot for the source for OS/2 for
the PPC, which should have fewer dependencies on M$. It
might just give a boost for those wanting to join the REACTOS
project.
NuDawn?
#1193 NuDawn?
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 2, 2005
Some one had mentioned a name change for this
project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
I think the url is http://soureforge.net/projects/nudawn
Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
its name to and combine with Nudawn?
BigWarpGuy
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 2, 2005
Some one had mentioned a name change for this
project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
I think the url is http://soureforge.net/projects/nudawn
Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
its name to and combine with Nudawn?
BigWarpGuy
Re: [osFree] NuDawn?
#1194 Re: [osFree] NuDawn?
Expand Messages
Kenn Yuill
Mar 2, 2005
Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 01:50 PM:
>Some one had mentioned a name change for this
>project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
>project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
>I think the url is http://soureforge.net/projects/nudawn
>Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
>its name to and combine with Nudawn?
>
>BigWarpGuy
>
>
Well, there is a "c" in "source", so the URL is
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn>.
The project looks inactive as you mention, so it would need some
publicity and activity to rekindle the interest of the original
developer & administrator, Patrick Ingle, as well as garner some
interest or support at SourceForge.
Here is the data from the above URL:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
NuDawn is an open source operating system guaranteeing support for DOS,
Windows (Win16/Win32), and OS/2 applications in one simple, configurable
package. Legacy hardware support is the prime directive of NuDawn,
allowing the installation on XT/286/386/486
This project has not yet categorized itself in the Trove Software Map
<http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php>.
Project UNIX name: nudawn
Registered: 2001-05-24 02:55
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Although very little has been done since the project's inception, there
have been 1084 "Page views" over the 1378 days of its existence, with 6
views from Jan. 7-15, 2005, if this figure indicates anything meaningful.
Personally, I don't like this name and would prefer a synonym for
phoenix in the same vein as "Ubuntu".
--
Ciao,
Kenn
_________________________________________________________
Always act as if life is a joyous journey. - Kenn Yuill
Warp4 FP15 - Thunderbird 1.0 - Firefox 1.0 GA
-oOo-
_____ A Quote for Today _____
The best helping hand that you will ever receive
is the one at the end of your own arm.
- Fred Dehner
_________________________________________________________
* TagZilla 0.057 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
--
Expand Messages
Kenn Yuill
Mar 2, 2005
Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 01:50 PM:
>Some one had mentioned a name change for this
>project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
>project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
>I think the url is http://soureforge.net/projects/nudawn
>Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
>its name to and combine with Nudawn?
>
>BigWarpGuy
>
>
Well, there is a "c" in "source", so the URL is
<http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn>.
The project looks inactive as you mention, so it would need some
publicity and activity to rekindle the interest of the original
developer & administrator, Patrick Ingle, as well as garner some
interest or support at SourceForge.
Here is the data from the above URL:
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
NuDawn is an open source operating system guaranteeing support for DOS,
Windows (Win16/Win32), and OS/2 applications in one simple, configurable
package. Legacy hardware support is the prime directive of NuDawn,
allowing the installation on XT/286/386/486
This project has not yet categorized itself in the Trove Software Map
<http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php>.
Project UNIX name: nudawn
Registered: 2001-05-24 02:55
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Although very little has been done since the project's inception, there
have been 1084 "Page views" over the 1378 days of its existence, with 6
views from Jan. 7-15, 2005, if this figure indicates anything meaningful.
Personally, I don't like this name and would prefer a synonym for
phoenix in the same vein as "Ubuntu".
--
Ciao,
Kenn
_________________________________________________________
Always act as if life is a joyous journey. - Kenn Yuill
Warp4 FP15 - Thunderbird 1.0 - Firefox 1.0 GA
-oOo-
_____ A Quote for Today _____
The best helping hand that you will ever receive
is the one at the end of your own arm.
- Fred Dehner
_________________________________________________________
* TagZilla 0.057 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
--
Re: [osFree] NuDawn?
#1195 Re: [osFree] NuDawn?
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 2, 2005
Kenn Yuill wrote:
>Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 01:50 PM:
>
>
>
>>Some one had mentioned a name change for this
>>project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
>>project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
>>I think the url is http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn
>>Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
>>its name to and combine with Nudawn?
>>
>>BigWarpGuy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Well, there is a "c" in "source", so the URL is
><http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn>.
>
>The project looks inactive as you mention, so it would need some
>publicity and activity to rekindle the interest of the original
>developer & administrator, Patrick Ingle, as well as garner some
>interest or support at SourceForge.
>
>Here is the data from the above URL:
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>NuDawn is an open source operating system guaranteeing support for DOS,
>Windows (Win16/Win32), and OS/2 applications in one simple, configurable
>package. Legacy hardware support is the prime directive of NuDawn,
>allowing the installation on XT/286/386/486
>This project has not yet categorized itself in the Trove Software Map
><http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php>.
>
>
>Project UNIX name: nudawn
>Registered: 2001-05-24 02:55
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Although very little has been done since the project's inception, there
>have been 1084 "Page views" over the 1378 days of its existence, with 6
>views from Jan. 7-15, 2005, if this figure indicates anything meaningful.
>
>Personally, I don't like this name and would prefer a synonym for
>phoenix in the same vein as "Ubuntu".
>
>
>
>
Sorry about the typo (I blame it on 'typing dyslexia'
).
Thank you for the information.
--
TomLeeM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BigWarpGuy - BigMiniGuy - BigDosGuy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://tomleem.homestead.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 2, 2005
Kenn Yuill wrote:
>Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 01:50 PM:
>
>
>
>>Some one had mentioned a name change for this
>>project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
>>project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
>>I think the url is http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn
>>Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
>>its name to and combine with Nudawn?
>>
>>BigWarpGuy
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>Well, there is a "c" in "source", so the URL is
><http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn>.
>
>The project looks inactive as you mention, so it would need some
>publicity and activity to rekindle the interest of the original
>developer & administrator, Patrick Ingle, as well as garner some
>interest or support at SourceForge.
>
>Here is the data from the above URL:
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>NuDawn is an open source operating system guaranteeing support for DOS,
>Windows (Win16/Win32), and OS/2 applications in one simple, configurable
>package. Legacy hardware support is the prime directive of NuDawn,
>allowing the installation on XT/286/386/486
>This project has not yet categorized itself in the Trove Software Map
><http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php>.
>
>
>Project UNIX name: nudawn
>Registered: 2001-05-24 02:55
>
> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>Although very little has been done since the project's inception, there
>have been 1084 "Page views" over the 1378 days of its existence, with 6
>views from Jan. 7-15, 2005, if this figure indicates anything meaningful.
>
>Personally, I don't like this name and would prefer a synonym for
>phoenix in the same vein as "Ubuntu".
>
>
>
>
Sorry about the typo (I blame it on 'typing dyslexia'
).Thank you for the information.
--
TomLeeM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BigWarpGuy - BigMiniGuy - BigDosGuy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://tomleem.homestead.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Re: [osFree] NuDawn?
#1196 Re: [osFree] NuDawn?
Expand Messages
Kenn Yuill
Mar 3, 2005
Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 09:43 PM:
>Kenn Yuill wrote:
>
>
>
>>Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 01:50 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Some one had mentioned a name change for this
>>>project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
>>>project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
>>>I think the url is http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn
>>>Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
>>>its name to and combine with Nudawn?
>>>
>>>BigWarpGuy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Well, there is a "c" in "source", so the URL is
>><http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn>.
>>
>>The project looks inactive as you mention, so it would need some
>>publicity and activity to rekindle the interest of the original
>>developer & administrator, Patrick Ingle, as well as garner some
>>interest or support at SourceForge.
>>
>>Here is the data from the above URL:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>NuDawn is an open source operating system guaranteeing support for DOS,
>>Windows (Win16/Win32), and OS/2 applications in one simple, configurable
>>package. Legacy hardware support is the prime directive of NuDawn,
>>allowing the installation on XT/286/386/486
>>This project has not yet categorized itself in the Trove Software Map
>><http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php>.
>>
>>
>>Project UNIX name: nudawn
>>Registered: 2001-05-24 02:55
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>Although very little has been done since the project's inception, there
>>have been 1084 "Page views" over the 1378 days of its existence, with 6
>>views from Jan. 7-15, 2005, if this figure indicates anything meaningful.
>>
>>Personally, I don't like this name and would prefer a synonym for
>>phoenix in the same vein as "Ubuntu".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Sorry about the typo (I blame it on 'typing dyslexia' ).
>
>Thank you for the information.
>
>
>
Yes, sometimes one finger doesn't know what the others are doing, .
I forgot to mention that anyone can log in at SourceForge and send a
message to Patrick Ingle at his address there, which is
"Email Address: vcrfix at users.sourceforge.net".
Please note that I haven't tried to do so and hope that this action does
*not* require a subscription to SourceForge at $39 (USD) per annum.
Although I favour support of open source endeavours, it would be a stiff
price for an e-mail to discover that the project administrator has
abandoned "NuDawn" and has no intention of reviving it.
--
Ciao,
Kenn
_________________________________________________________
Always act as if life is a joyous journey. - Kenn Yuill
Warp4 FP15 - Thunderbird 1.0 - Firefox 1.0 GA
-oOo-
_____ A Quote for Today _____
Overheard at the psychiatrist's office:
My intuition nearly makes up for my lack of good judgement.
- Unknown
_________________________________________________________
* TagZilla 0.057 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
--
Expand Messages
Kenn Yuill
Mar 3, 2005
Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 09:43 PM:
>Kenn Yuill wrote:
>
>
>
>>Tom Lee Mullins wrote as follows on 03/02/05 01:50 PM:
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>>Some one had mentioned a name change for this
>>>project. There is another (now seems abaondoned)
>>>project to clone OS/2 called Nudawn.
>>>I think the url is http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn
>>>Nudawn has a nice ring to it. Perhaps OSFree could change
>>>its name to and combine with Nudawn?
>>>
>>>BigWarpGuy
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>Well, there is a "c" in "source", so the URL is
>><http://sourceforge.net/projects/nudawn>.
>>
>>The project looks inactive as you mention, so it would need some
>>publicity and activity to rekindle the interest of the original
>>developer & administrator, Patrick Ingle, as well as garner some
>>interest or support at SourceForge.
>>
>>Here is the data from the above URL:
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>NuDawn is an open source operating system guaranteeing support for DOS,
>>Windows (Win16/Win32), and OS/2 applications in one simple, configurable
>>package. Legacy hardware support is the prime directive of NuDawn,
>>allowing the installation on XT/286/386/486
>>This project has not yet categorized itself in the Trove Software Map
>><http://sourceforge.net/softwaremap/trove_list.php>.
>>
>>
>>Project UNIX name: nudawn
>>Registered: 2001-05-24 02:55
>>
>> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
>>
>>Although very little has been done since the project's inception, there
>>have been 1084 "Page views" over the 1378 days of its existence, with 6
>>views from Jan. 7-15, 2005, if this figure indicates anything meaningful.
>>
>>Personally, I don't like this name and would prefer a synonym for
>>phoenix in the same vein as "Ubuntu".
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>Sorry about the typo (I blame it on 'typing dyslexia'
).>
>Thank you for the information.
>
>
>
Yes, sometimes one finger doesn't know what the others are doing,
.I forgot to mention that anyone can log in at SourceForge and send a
message to Patrick Ingle at his address there, which is
"Email Address: vcrfix at users.sourceforge.net".
Please note that I haven't tried to do so and hope that this action does
*not* require a subscription to SourceForge at $39 (USD) per annum.
Although I favour support of open source endeavours, it would be a stiff
price for an e-mail to discover that the project administrator has
abandoned "NuDawn" and has no intention of reviving it.
--
Ciao,
Kenn
_________________________________________________________
Always act as if life is a joyous journey. - Kenn Yuill
Warp4 FP15 - Thunderbird 1.0 - Firefox 1.0 GA
-oOo-
_____ A Quote for Today _____
Overheard at the psychiatrist's office:
My intuition nearly makes up for my lack of good judgement.
- Unknown
_________________________________________________________
* TagZilla 0.057 * http://tagzilla.mozdev.org
--
Re: NuDawn?
#1197 Re: NuDawn?
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 3, 2005
....
> >Sorry about the typo (I blame it on 'typing dyslexia' ).
> >
> >Thank you for the information.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yes, sometimes one finger doesn't know
> what the others are doing, .
>
> I forgot to mention that anyone can log
> in at SourceForge and send a
> message to Patrick Ingle at his
> address there, which is
> "Email Address: vcrfix at users.sourceforge.net".
> Please note that I haven't tried to do so and
> hope that this action does
> *not* require a subscription to
> SourceForge at $39 (USD) per annum.
> Although I favour support of open
> source endeavours, it would be a stiff
> price for an e-mail to discover that the
> project administrator has
> abandoned "NuDawn" and has no intention
> of reviving it.
>
>
> --
> Ciao,
> Kenn
>
I have a login id and password for SourceForge.
I do not remember being charged for it. It migh
have changed since I joined. There is also a
forum there too (you will see that most of the
posts are from me). I will try to contact him
via the e-mail).
BigWarpGuy
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 3, 2005
....
> >Sorry about the typo (I blame it on 'typing dyslexia'
).> >
> >Thank you for the information.
> >
> >
> >
>
> Yes, sometimes one finger doesn't know
> what the others are doing,
.>
> I forgot to mention that anyone can log
> in at SourceForge and send a
> message to Patrick Ingle at his
> address there, which is
> "Email Address: vcrfix at users.sourceforge.net".
> Please note that I haven't tried to do so and
> hope that this action does
> *not* require a subscription to
> SourceForge at $39 (USD) per annum.
> Although I favour support of open
> source endeavours, it would be a stiff
> price for an e-mail to discover that the
> project administrator has
> abandoned "NuDawn" and has no intention
> of reviving it.
>
>
> --
> Ciao,
> Kenn
>
I have a login id and password for SourceForge.
I do not remember being charged for it. It migh
have changed since I joined. There is also a
forum there too (you will see that most of the
posts are from me). I will try to contact him
via the e-mail).
BigWarpGuy
Open Sourcing of OS/2 et al...
#1198 Open Sourcing of OS/2 et al...
Expand Messages
Mark D. Overholser
Mar 3, 2005
I have been thinking about "The Open Sourcing of OS/2" (again).
I have been an OS/2 user since JUN-1993.
(See this link for a history of my computer experience
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/os2user/message/2745>)
I am not an expert, but I have followed most all the History of OS/2.
There has been MUCH talk about asking OS/2 to release the Source Code to
OS/2, and there has been much talk for IBM'ers and Former IBM'ers about
why IBM can not release the Source Code.
BACKGROUND HISTORY
=====================================================
Read some history on OS/2 from "Michal Necasek" here:
<http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/index.html>
The REALLY BIG PROBLEM is MicroSoft!! MS and IBM Jointly Developed OS/2
(ver 1.x that is). There is Shared Copyrights involved. IBM might be
willing, but MicroSoft won't be (interested in releasing the Source Code).
The best thing about OS/2, is that Unlike Windows 9x/NT, the "parts" are
"separate".
Lets start with 32 bit OS/2 (OS/2 2.x to Current).
MicroSoft has "rights" to:
The 16 bit (OS/2 1.x ) part of OS/2.
The Server Message Block (SMB) Peer and Client networking.
and
The Presentation Manager GUI interface (OS/2 1.x ) which, IIRC is still
available in the current version of Warp.
MicroSoft may not have "rights" to:
The TCP/IP stack.
IBM "ported" the TCP/IP stack from the AIX version (4.1 and newer), (and
ported originally from BSD...). See:
<http://www.mo.himolde.no/~ltning/os2/> (No longer available
)
and
<http://os2.in.ru/guru/tcpip/ipsece.html>
The WorkPlace Shell.
IBM started on 32 bit OS/2, and MicroSoft went on there own way with
Windows 3.x.
Other 32 Bit Code parts, like the Graphic Sub System, and such.
The Source Code for OS/2 PPC.
I doubt that MicroSoft has any Copyrights on OS/2's TCP/IP stack or the
WorkPlace Shell, or other IBM specific things added after the BreakUp.
=====================================================
I propose, that WE ask IBM to release the Source Code for the parts of
OS/2, that were developed AFTER the BreakUp of IBM/MicroSoft OS/2 1.x
development. Since there is MOST LIKELY, limited cross licensing involved.
The OSFree groups would need to develop the Kernel, and Core OS (Like
OS/2 1.0 SE, but 32 bit), add Samba for the SMB File Sharing, Open JFS
and other Open Source parts to get the OS up and running.
The Contributed (IBM) Source would add the WPShell, and TCP/IP (enhanced
to IPv6 ??) and other 32bit parts.
The "trick here", is getting someone at IBM to look through ALL the
Parts of OS/2, and checking the Licenses in respect to MicroSoft and
other 3rd Parties.. And then getting releases or cleaning up the Code,
to get it released as Open Source.
What do you all think?
MarkO
Expand Messages
Mark D. Overholser
Mar 3, 2005
I have been thinking about "The Open Sourcing of OS/2" (again).
I have been an OS/2 user since JUN-1993.
(See this link for a history of my computer experience
<http://groups.yahoo.com/group/os2user/message/2745>)
I am not an expert, but I have followed most all the History of OS/2.
There has been MUCH talk about asking OS/2 to release the Source Code to
OS/2, and there has been much talk for IBM'ers and Former IBM'ers about
why IBM can not release the Source Code.
BACKGROUND HISTORY
=====================================================
Read some history on OS/2 from "Michal Necasek" here:
<http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/index.html>
The REALLY BIG PROBLEM is MicroSoft!! MS and IBM Jointly Developed OS/2
(ver 1.x that is). There is Shared Copyrights involved. IBM might be
willing, but MicroSoft won't be (interested in releasing the Source Code).
The best thing about OS/2, is that Unlike Windows 9x/NT, the "parts" are
"separate".
Lets start with 32 bit OS/2 (OS/2 2.x to Current).
MicroSoft has "rights" to:
The 16 bit (OS/2 1.x ) part of OS/2.
The Server Message Block (SMB) Peer and Client networking.
and
The Presentation Manager GUI interface (OS/2 1.x ) which, IIRC is still
available in the current version of Warp.
MicroSoft may not have "rights" to:
The TCP/IP stack.
IBM "ported" the TCP/IP stack from the AIX version (4.1 and newer), (and
ported originally from BSD...). See:
<http://www.mo.himolde.no/~ltning/os2/> (No longer available
)and
<http://os2.in.ru/guru/tcpip/ipsece.html>
The WorkPlace Shell.
IBM started on 32 bit OS/2, and MicroSoft went on there own way with
Windows 3.x.
Other 32 Bit Code parts, like the Graphic Sub System, and such.
The Source Code for OS/2 PPC.
I doubt that MicroSoft has any Copyrights on OS/2's TCP/IP stack or the
WorkPlace Shell, or other IBM specific things added after the BreakUp.
=====================================================
I propose, that WE ask IBM to release the Source Code for the parts of
OS/2, that were developed AFTER the BreakUp of IBM/MicroSoft OS/2 1.x
development. Since there is MOST LIKELY, limited cross licensing involved.
The OSFree groups would need to develop the Kernel, and Core OS (Like
OS/2 1.0 SE, but 32 bit), add Samba for the SMB File Sharing, Open JFS
and other Open Source parts to get the OS up and running.
The Contributed (IBM) Source would add the WPShell, and TCP/IP (enhanced
to IPv6 ??) and other 32bit parts.
The "trick here", is getting someone at IBM to look through ALL the
Parts of OS/2, and checking the Licenses in respect to MicroSoft and
other 3rd Parties.. And then getting releases or cleaning up the Code,
to get it released as Open Source.
What do you all think?
MarkO
Re: [osFree] Open Sourcing of OS/2 et al...
#1199 Re: [osFree] Open Sourcing of OS/2 et al...
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 3, 2005
Mark D. Overholser wrote:
>
> I have been thinking about "The Open Sourcing of OS/2" (again).
>
> I have been an OS/2 user since JUN-1993.
> (See this link for a history of my computer experience
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/os2user/message/2745>)
>
> I am not an expert, but I have followed most all the History of OS/2.
>
>
> There has been MUCH talk about asking OS/2 to release the Source Code to
> OS/2, and there has been much talk for IBM'ers and Former IBM'ers about
> why IBM can not release the Source Code.
>
> BACKGROUND HISTORY
> =====================================================
> Read some history on OS/2 from "Michal Necasek" here:
> <http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/index.html>
>
>
> The REALLY BIG PROBLEM is MicroSoft!! MS and IBM Jointly Developed OS/2
> (ver 1.x that is). There is Shared Copyrights involved. IBM might be
> willing, but MicroSoft won't be (interested in releasing the Source Code).
>
> The best thing about OS/2, is that Unlike Windows 9x/NT, the "parts" are
> "separate".
>
> Lets start with 32 bit OS/2 (OS/2 2.x to Current).
>
>
> MicroSoft has "rights" to:
>
> The 16 bit (OS/2 1.x ) part of OS/2.
> The Server Message Block (SMB) Peer and Client networking.
> and
> The Presentation Manager GUI interface (OS/2 1.x ) which, IIRC is still
> available in the current version of Warp.
>
> MicroSoft may not have "rights" to:
> The TCP/IP stack.
> IBM "ported" the TCP/IP stack from the AIX version (4.1 and newer), (and
> ported originally from BSD...). See:
> <http://www.mo.himolde.no/~ltning/os2/
> <http://www.mo.himolde.no/%7Eltning/os2/>> (No longer available )
> and
> <http://os2.in.ru/guru/tcpip/ipsece.html>
>
> The WorkPlace Shell.
> IBM started on 32 bit OS/2, and MicroSoft went on there own way with
> Windows 3.x.
>
> Other 32 Bit Code parts, like the Graphic Sub System, and such.
>
> The Source Code for OS/2 PPC.
>
>
> I doubt that MicroSoft has any Copyrights on OS/2's TCP/IP stack or the
> WorkPlace Shell, or other IBM specific things added after the BreakUp.
> =====================================================
>
>
> I propose, that WE ask IBM to release the Source Code for the parts of
> OS/2, that were developed AFTER the BreakUp of IBM/MicroSoft OS/2 1.x
> development. Since there is MOST LIKELY, limited cross licensing
> involved.
>
> The OSFree groups would need to develop the Kernel, and Core OS (Like
> OS/2 1.0 SE, but 32 bit), add Samba for the SMB File Sharing, Open JFS
> and other Open Source parts to get the OS up and running.
>
> The Contributed (IBM) Source would add the WPShell, and TCP/IP (enhanced
> to IPv6 ??) and other 32bit parts.
>
>
> The "trick here", is getting someone at IBM to look through ALL the
> Parts of OS/2, and checking the Licenses in respect to MicroSoft and
> other 3rd Parties.. And then getting releases or cleaning up the Code,
> to get it released as Open Source.
>
>
> What do you all think?
>
>
> MarkO
>
Thank you for the information.
I am hoping with IBM's 'release' and 'support' of software
and open source projects, it might continue that trend with
OS/2. Perhaps some is doing what you are suggesting? (being
very optimistic).
TomLeeM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BigWarpGuy - BigMiniGuy - BigDosGuy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://tomleem.homestead.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Expand Messages
Tom Lee Mullins
Mar 3, 2005
Mark D. Overholser wrote:
>
> I have been thinking about "The Open Sourcing of OS/2" (again).
>
> I have been an OS/2 user since JUN-1993.
> (See this link for a history of my computer experience
> <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/os2user/message/2745>)
>
> I am not an expert, but I have followed most all the History of OS/2.
>
>
> There has been MUCH talk about asking OS/2 to release the Source Code to
> OS/2, and there has been much talk for IBM'ers and Former IBM'ers about
> why IBM can not release the Source Code.
>
> BACKGROUND HISTORY
> =====================================================
> Read some history on OS/2 from "Michal Necasek" here:
> <http://pages.prodigy.net/michaln/history/index.html>
>
>
> The REALLY BIG PROBLEM is MicroSoft!! MS and IBM Jointly Developed OS/2
> (ver 1.x that is). There is Shared Copyrights involved. IBM might be
> willing, but MicroSoft won't be (interested in releasing the Source Code).
>
> The best thing about OS/2, is that Unlike Windows 9x/NT, the "parts" are
> "separate".
>
> Lets start with 32 bit OS/2 (OS/2 2.x to Current).
>
>
> MicroSoft has "rights" to:
>
> The 16 bit (OS/2 1.x ) part of OS/2.
> The Server Message Block (SMB) Peer and Client networking.
> and
> The Presentation Manager GUI interface (OS/2 1.x ) which, IIRC is still
> available in the current version of Warp.
>
> MicroSoft may not have "rights" to:
> The TCP/IP stack.
> IBM "ported" the TCP/IP stack from the AIX version (4.1 and newer), (and
> ported originally from BSD...). See:
> <http://www.mo.himolde.no/~ltning/os2/
> <http://www.mo.himolde.no/%7Eltning/os2/>> (No longer available
)> and
> <http://os2.in.ru/guru/tcpip/ipsece.html>
>
> The WorkPlace Shell.
> IBM started on 32 bit OS/2, and MicroSoft went on there own way with
> Windows 3.x.
>
> Other 32 Bit Code parts, like the Graphic Sub System, and such.
>
> The Source Code for OS/2 PPC.
>
>
> I doubt that MicroSoft has any Copyrights on OS/2's TCP/IP stack or the
> WorkPlace Shell, or other IBM specific things added after the BreakUp.
> =====================================================
>
>
> I propose, that WE ask IBM to release the Source Code for the parts of
> OS/2, that were developed AFTER the BreakUp of IBM/MicroSoft OS/2 1.x
> development. Since there is MOST LIKELY, limited cross licensing
> involved.
>
> The OSFree groups would need to develop the Kernel, and Core OS (Like
> OS/2 1.0 SE, but 32 bit), add Samba for the SMB File Sharing, Open JFS
> and other Open Source parts to get the OS up and running.
>
> The Contributed (IBM) Source would add the WPShell, and TCP/IP (enhanced
> to IPv6 ??) and other 32bit parts.
>
>
> The "trick here", is getting someone at IBM to look through ALL the
> Parts of OS/2, and checking the Licenses in respect to MicroSoft and
> other 3rd Parties.. And then getting releases or cleaning up the Code,
> to get it released as Open Source.
>
>
> What do you all think?
>
>
> MarkO
>
Thank you for the information.
I am hoping with IBM's 'release' and 'support' of software
and open source projects, it might continue that trend with
OS/2. Perhaps some is doing what you are suggesting? (being
very optimistic).
TomLeeM
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
BigWarpGuy - BigMiniGuy - BigDosGuy
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
http://tomleem.homestead.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *