AROS World Exec
Development => Development (General) => Topic started by: terminills on December 11, 2020, 05:34:32 AM
-
So ABIv1 is supposed to be the bleeding edge of AROS however does anyone actually test it? How about bug reports?
Bugtracker: https://github.com/aros-development-team/AROS/issues
Nightly Builds: https://aros.sourceforge.io/nightly1.php
-
IMHO, to this question you need to attach a link to the bugtrack and the fresh build ABIv1 like deadwood (https://ae.amigalife.org/index.php?topic=632.0).
I ran abiv1. The only thing that interested me was SMP..
-
IMHO, to this question you need to attach a link to the bugtrack and the fresh build ABIv1 like deadwood (https://ae.amigalife.org/index.php?topic=632.0).
I ran abiv1. The only thing that interested me was SMP..
Good point added to the first post. As for Deadwood's backport people need to remember without bug reports for ABIv1 there will eventually nothing to backport.
-
I'm sorry to say but this version of AROS made diversity and almost killed the project.
I know there are some advantages, but looking at the history I'm more than happy with ABI v.0
From a users standpoint it is hard to tell the difference.
Unless someone come up with a very stable ABI v.1 release with a lot of the software found on ABI v.0
I do not see it happen. I heard before that it is not up to the main OS devs. to do that, some should make
a distribution based on it. Well, we tried. It is to many problems with the OS itself and the development tools.
Now Deadwood updated ABI v.0 with a lot of the work done in ABI v.1 and this makes me want to come back.
I'm not interested in a version of a OS I can not use. I'm neither interested in a OS where it is to much problems that seams to never get fixed. With that I'm not refaring only to ABI v.1 but also ABI v.0.
I think ABI v.0 came close to be very stable and with latest release from Deadwood it is even better. I have to test it more to have a final opinion but it is looking bright :)
-
I'm sorry to say but this version of AROS made diversity and almost killed the project.
I know there are some advantages, but looking at the history I'm more than happy with ABI v.0
From a users standpoint it is hard to tell the difference.
Interesting I personally find abiv0 to be stale and dead as a matter of fact without abiv1 you wouldn’t be getting the fixes or improvements you’re getting
Unless someone come up with a very stable ABI v.1 release with a lot of the software found on ABI v.0
I do not see it happen. I heard before that it is not up to the main OS devs. to do that, some should make
a distribution based on it. Well, we tried. It is to many problems with the OS itself and the development tools.
Many of those problems you’re inheriting with the back port effort.
Now Deadwood updated ABI v.0 with a lot of the work done in ABI v.1 and this makes me want to come back.
I'm not interested in a version of a OS I can not use. I'm neither interested in a OS where it is to much problems that seams to never get fixed. With that I'm not refaring only to ABI v.1 but also ABI v.0.
I think ABI v.0 came close to be very stable and with latest release from Deadwood it is even better. I have to test it more to have a final opinion but it is looking bright :)
Sure it’s great deadwood is putting the effort in for the users and distro maintainers but end of the day if abov1 stops and no one tests it you’ll be able to enjoy your nice stable updateless os.
Please ignore typos and grammar lol I’m typing on my phone. 😂😂
-
Another problem is that ABI v.1 isn't yet finalized, AFAIR.
-
Unless someone come up with a very stable ABI v.1 release with a lot of the software found on ABI v.0
I do not see it happen. I heard before that it is not up to the main OS devs. to do that, some should make
a distribution based on it. Well, we tried. It is to many problems with the OS itself and the development tools.
Many of those problems you’re inheriting with the back port effort.
Actually much of testing of master branch happens due backport and it has ever been like that. The way I see there are essentially three groups of people: users, non-user testers and developers. Developers are obviously also testers focused on certain areas, but user only become testers when they use the software. Master branch of AROS today is not attractive enough to attract users.
In my mind the backport and master as in symbiosis. Backport receives growth from master, master receives testing from backport.
-
Unless someone come up with a very stable ABI v.1 release with a lot of the software found on ABI v.0
I do not see it happen. I heard before that it is not up to the main OS devs. to do that, some should make
a distribution based on it. Well, we tried. It is to many problems with the OS itself and the development tools.
Many of those problems you’re inheriting with the back port effort.
Actually much of testing of master branch happens due backport and it has ever been like that. The way I see there are essentially three groups of people: users, non-user testers and developers. Developers are obviously also testers focused on certain areas, but user only become testers when they use the software. Master branch of AROS today is not attractive enough to attract users.
In my mind the backport and master as in symbiosis. Backport receives growth from master, master receives testing from backport.
That’s great to a point. What happens if all a sudden you don’t come back to do it again? Sure currently you’re receiving bug reports which is great. However, look at the last what 5-6 years? No bug reports nor fixes Happened to abiv0. And because not enough people are testing abiv1 it was left mainly to developers to catch bugs which in turn makes more work for your backport as if we had more people putting the effort in to find bugs in ABIv1 there would be fewer bugs to backport to ABIv0.
-
user only become testers when they use the software. Master branch of AROS today is not attractive enough to attract users.
This is absolutely certain. Cannot be kicked into happiness. Users don't owe anything to anyone.
If the user is loading AROS slowly, he just goes to pump the heroes on STEAM.
And it was a GOOD user, since the BAD user one would immediately go to play.
The reality is different from what most developers imagine.
You can ask, but in reality those two groups of users who are rather testers and developers themselves will respond.
These are very, very few people and they are all enthusiasts, communists, etc. :)
-
user only become testers when they use the software. Master branch of AROS today is not attractive enough to attract users.
This is absolutely certain. Cannot be kicked into happiness. Users don't owe anything to anyone.
If the user is loading AROS slowly, he just goes to pump the heroes on STEAM.
And it was a GOOD user, since the BAD user one would immediately go to play.
The reality is different from what most developers imagine.
You can ask, but in reality those two groups of users who are rather testers and developers themselves will respond.
These are very, very few people and they are all enthusiasts, communists, etc. :)
Actually, I would say the developers owe the users nothing, not the other way around. Sure you cannot force someone to test not saying otherwise however if as a user you're not willing to put any effort in helping find bugs you can expect the same in return from developers fixing said bugs. However let's use the current USB issue as an example. I personally found and reported that 3 years ago for ABIv1 which if anyone had paid attention to the bug tracker they would have expected it including the breakdown of how 1.1 worked, 2.0 was flakey and 3.0 was essentially useless.
-
Actually, I would say the developers owe the users nothing, not the other way around. Sure you cannot force someone to test not saying otherwise however if as a user you're not willing to put any effort in helping find bugs you can expect the same in return from developers fixing said bugs. However let's use the current USB issue as an example. I personally found and reported that 3 years ago for ABIv1 which if anyone had paid attention to the bug tracker they would have expected it including the breakdown of how 1.1 worked, 2.0 was flakey and 3.0 was essentially useless.
So I wrote about it above. You are discussing pink ponies. In fact, there are simply no clear users. ;)
Personally I will test ABIv1. However, I will first translate and update the existing Russian translations of all AROS.
Then I have an earlier promise (https://ae.amigalife.org/index.php?topic=622).
I didn't succeed with this nonsense (https://ae.amigalife.org/index.php?topic=97.msg5373#new), but I didn't spend any meaningful time on it.
There are some things in the AROS itself that I would like to change. And collectively it is called a hobby.
I'm sure that the answers of other "users" will be similar.
p.S. In fact, not all that bad. All that is needed is a team in which people will work according to the algorithm set by the leader. but it will take time to reach a consensus: what is important and what is secondary. It's good if the members of such a team live in one country, and better in a city. Then a strong leader can resolve conflicts in person. I don't know how real it's in your environment..
p.P.S. Russian AROS user usually looks like this: 1) The PC user came across AROS on the 4pda.ru forum and became interested. 2) Then the user installed to look and clicked everywhere, wondered. 3) Deleted it. Only a few linger on point 2. these are people with a certain history behind them or with a certain character. The good news is that there are actually many such people. They just use, for example ReactOS, OpenBSD, but AROS has nothing to attract them now. Why did I start translating into russian? Somewhere there is one and a half geeks who need it, they just don't know about it yet. ;D
-
Not payed developers do what they want. Payed developers do it for the money and sometimes it can be a mix. In AROS world it is mostly a mix. Do something you like yourself, make other people happy and there is a carrot in the end.
The last one made many things happen. At least when it comes to software like MPlayer, Audio Evolution or Odyssey web-browser.
Sure things happened to AROS abi v.1 last years but it is not a big deal. It is mostly Kalamatee that worked on it. The Vampire team also worked on it as they need a legal OS for their hardware.
If ABI v.1 was a stable branch and most important software got ported to it, lot more would happen to it.
When everyone left ABI v.0 I waited patiently and tried to make ABI v.1 64-bit distribution with little luck. I tried to get some devs. to compile stuff for it but it was a mess. I try the AROS ABI v.1 versions from time to time but it is to much bugs and problems to catch my attention.
-
Not payed developers do what they want. Payed developers do it for the money and sometimes it can be a mix. In AROS world it is mostly a mix. Do something you like yourself, make other people happy and there is a carrot in the end.
The last one made many things happen. At least when it comes to software like MPlayer, Audio Evolution or Odyssey web-browser.
Sure things happened to AROS abi v.1 last years but it is not a big deal. It is mostly Kalamatee that worked on it. The Vampire team also worked on it as they need a legal OS for their hardware.
How can you say it's not a "big deal" when you're literally praising the backport effort which is essentially all the "not a big deal changes"
If ABI v.1 was a stable branch and most important software got ported to it, lot more would happen to it.
This is exactly why all my future paid projects will not be ported to abiv0(I made a promise for Final Writer which I intend to keep). :)
When everyone left ABI v.0 I waited patiently and tried to make ABI v.1 64-bit distribution with little luck. I tried to get some devs. to compile stuff for it but it was a mess. I try the AROS ABI v.1 versions from time to time but it is to much bugs and problems to catch my attention.
How many of those bugs did you report or submit to the bug tracker?
-
I do not say big deal cause that would be a complete update with more gfx drivers, network drivers and all other kind of drivers. USB 3 support, wanderer updated, improved and so much more. If I fill inn a bug report who will test it when it is hardware related? In the past I rather communicate through a forum or directly with the developer.
-
I do not say big deal cause that would be a complete update with more gfx drivers, network drivers and all other kind of drivers. USB 3 support, wanderer updated, improved and so much more. If I fill inn a bug report who will test it when it is hardware related? In the past I rather communicate through a forum or directly with the developer.
Well, let's see I had hardware issues with the latest Ryzen processors which is exactly why Michal and Kalamatee both have Ryzen machines(Hint I purchased them). Also if ABIv1 has hardware issues then eventually the ABIv0 backport will have the same ones. What developers are reading these forums lately(besides obviously deadwood)?
-
Interesting I personally find abiv0 to be stale and dead as a matter of fact without abiv1 you wouldn’t be getting the fixes or improvements you’re getting
Many of those problems you’re inheriting with the back port effort.
Sure it’s great deadwood is putting the effort in for the users and distro maintainers but end of the day if abov1 stops and no one tests it you’ll be able to enjoy your nice stable updateless os.
Nothing is dead when someone is still working on it.
From my personal point of view, ABIv1 is a total waste of time on x86 and a very-good-thing-to-have on x64 and M68K. But you simply can't believe people will follow you on the v1 bandwagon if there is NO software for it. And when I say no software, i mean there are no OWB, no MPlayer, no RNOpublisher, no Audio Evolution, no AmiStart, no ZuneTools, and even no Janus-UAE 1 with desktop integration. Users aren't beta-testers: users are people pretending to USE the operating system to perform several task: no software, no tasks, no motivation to install the OS.
When the split to ABIv1 decision was taken, the only needed requisite was a quick transition to ABIv1, but nobody cared about this issue. Result is, and I WARNED everybody on the AROS-DEV mailing list about this, that without this quick transition we would have ended into having a userland confined into ABIv0 forever and developers working with no testing, no feedback, no users on an ABIv1 version nobody would have cared about. Now tell me, after 10 years, if I was wrong.
Now there's very little we can do about this: just prey there always be a Deadwood willing to backport, because the only AROS considered by users is ABIv0 and, without ABIv0 being brought further, you won't have any modernized ABIv1 either: the project on x86 will just stave and die, with 1-2 developers still being active on it. I can be interested into a stable AROS64 distribution, but surely current Icaros Desktop will never get a x86 ABIv1 kernel.
-
<test on>
AROS64 doesn't load with any of the menu options in VirtualBox 6.1 (https://github.com/aros-development-team/AROS/issues/168)
</test off>
I remember two months ago it AROS64 was still loaded, but with only two work options in the menu. Broke. :-\
-
I do not say big deal cause that would be a complete update with more gfx drivers, network drivers and all other kind of drivers. USB 3 support, wanderer updated, improved and so much more. If I fill inn a bug report who will test it when it is hardware related? In the past I rather communicate through a forum or directly with the developer.
Well, let's see I had hardware issues with the latest Ryzen processors which is exactly why Michal and Kalamatee both have Ryzen machines(Hint I purchased them). Also if ABIv1 has hardware issues then eventually the ABIv0 backport will have the same ones. What developers are reading these forums lately(besides obviously deadwood)?
Terminills: I'm afraid we are going nowhere with this. There are no interest in ABI v.1 apart from the 68k version. Who are going to work on the bug reports? Kalamatee and Michael, if you buy them the hardware you have? That is for sure an option, but no garantee they can fix, do anything about it. If you like to do something real serious about this my suggestion is that you buy Kalamatee and Michael some reference hardware and get everything to work. Native GFX using 3D hardware, Sound, wi-fi and USB and you will get my and many others attention.
-
I do not say big deal cause that would be a complete update with more gfx drivers, network drivers and all other kind of drivers. USB 3 support, wanderer updated, improved and so much more. If I fill inn a bug report who will test it when it is hardware related? In the past I rather communicate through a forum or directly with the developer.
Well, let's see I had hardware issues with the latest Ryzen processors which is exactly why Michal and Kalamatee both have Ryzen machines(Hint I purchased them). Also if ABIv1 has hardware issues then eventually the ABIv0 backport will have the same ones. What developers are reading these forums lately(besides obviously deadwood)?
Terminills: I'm afraid we are going nowhere with this. There are no interest in ABI v.1 apart from the 68k version. Who are going to work on the bug reports? Kalamatee and Michael, if you buy them the hardware you have? That is for sure an option, but no garantee they can fix, do anything about it. If you like to do something real serious about this my suggestion is that you buy Kalamatee and Michael some reference hardware and get everything to work. Native GFX using 3D hardware, Sound, wi-fi and USB and you will get my and many others attention.
Maybe you missed the part where I did buy the reference hardware. You can thank me when usb3 is fixed and you have Radeon drivers and updated hda drivers. 😂😂😂
-
<test on>
AROS64 doesn't load with any of the menu options in VirtualBox 6.1 (https://github.com/aros-development-team/AROS/issues/168)
</test off>
I remember two months ago it AROS64 was still loaded, but with only two work options in the menu. Broke. :-\
Thank you...
-
I do not say big deal cause that would be a complete update with more gfx drivers, network drivers and all other kind of drivers. USB 3 support, wanderer updated, improved and so much more. If I fill inn a bug report who will test it when it is hardware related? In the past I rather communicate through a forum or directly with the developer.
Well, let's see I had hardware issues with the latest Ryzen processors which is exactly why Michal and Kalamatee both have Ryzen machines(Hint I purchased them). Also if ABIv1 has hardware issues then eventually the ABIv0 backport will have the same ones. What developers are reading these forums lately(besides obviously deadwood)?
Terminills: I'm afraid we are going nowhere with this. There are no interest in ABI v.1 apart from the 68k version. Who are going to work on the bug reports? Kalamatee and Michael, if you buy them the hardware you have? That is for sure an option, but no garantee they can fix, do anything about it. If you like to do something real serious about this my suggestion is that you buy Kalamatee and Michael some reference hardware and get everything to work. Native GFX using 3D hardware, Sound, wi-fi and USB and you will get my and many others attention.
Maybe you missed the part where I did buy the reference hardware. You can thank me when usb3 is fixed and you have Radeon drivers and updated hda drivers.
No, I did not miss that part but I though it was just the mobo, CPU. If, when everything is working I will for sure thank you :)
-
just a side question, does the gcc is again working for ABIv1 x64? Last time I tried it was constantly crashing and some month later still same effect, difficult to develop, port, test something when even the gcc is not working and nobody cares.
-
just a side question, does the gcc is again working for ABIv1 x64? Last time I tried it was constantly crashing and some month later still same effect, difficult to develop, port, test something when even the gcc is not working and nobody cares.
Yes, exactly. The development tools are not working correct. Not strange no one compile anything.
-
just a side question, does the gcc is again working for ABIv1 x64? Last time I tried it was constantly crashing and some month later still same effect, difficult to develop, port, test something when even the gcc is not working and nobody cares.
I couldn't build the toolchain for ABIv1 x64. I'm not compiling for ABIv1 x86_64 and MorphOS, but compiling for AmigaOS 3, AmigaOS 4 and AROS ABIv0. :) If there was a ready-made and working toolchain for ABIv1 x64 downloaded from here (http://archives.aros-exec.org/index.php?function=browse&cat=development/cross), then I would quick recompile it all (https://tinyurl.com/y9m749s9) for ABIv1 x64. This is a trifle, but you have to start somewhere. In short, I’m not complaining, but I understand that I’ll sooner build the toolchain for ABIv1 and upload it there, than download it ready from there. ;D
-
just a side question, does the gcc is again working for ABIv1 x64? Last time I tried it was constantly crashing and some month later still same effect, difficult to develop, port, test something when even the gcc is not working and nobody cares.
I couldn't build the toolchain for ABIv1 x64. I'm not compiling for ABIv1 x86_64 and MorphOS, but compiling for AmigaOS 3, AmigaOS 4 and AROS ABIv0. :) If there was a ready-made and working toolchain for ABIv1 x64 downloaded from here (http://archives.aros-exec.org/index.php?function=browse&cat=development/cross), then I would quick recompile it all (https://tinyurl.com/y9m749s9) for ABIv1 x64. This is a trifle, but you have to start somewhere. In short, I’m not complaining, but I understand that I’ll sooner build the toolchain for ABIv1 and upload it there, than download it ready from there. ;D
Hi. I tried building a Ubuntu-based virtual machine which easily allow to compile abiv1-64 executables from Linux. Look for it in Icaros Desktop's website.
To be honest, though, the high curiosity about Icaros 64 was followed by the total lack of interest by 3rd party coders, who, with a couple of exceptions, completely avoided compiling things for 64bit architecture. Moreover, most of the programs you see on the Archives, although compiled for x64-aros, are NOT compatible anymore and nobody cares about this, neither aros developers, nor applications ones. So I wonder what the hell we're doing here. I don't like spending my time, money and efforts on something nobody cares about. So I turned back to my old cheer ABIv0 32-bit icaros and put the 64 bit version in the fridge. Better times will come, to bring it back to attention. At least I still have some real USER that enjoys what I do.
You can't attract developers if you continue repeating they will need to recompile their software over and over again.
You can't even attract the one-time casual dev, if AROS 64's gcc doesnt even work
and you definitely can't attract USERS, if you don't bring APPLICATIONS.
No users, no testing, no fixing, but just having two developers, the only ones that hasn't quarreled with each other, still bringing marvellous new features nobody will use, breaking the older ones without nobody even noticing.
Not exactly the bright future I dreamt of about AROS.
-
(There are no interest in ABI v.1) i dont think thats true, if someone create a ABI v.1 Distro like icaros/aspireOS and nicely polished design and silky look and amiga feeling. Users will try and people will restart compiling what ever they compiled for ab1_v.0 for ABI v.1..
-
(There are no interest in ABI v.1) i dont think thats true, if someone create a ABI v.1 Distro like icaros/aspireOS and nicely polished design and silky look and amiga feeling. Users will try and people will restart compiling what ever they compiled for ab1_v.0 for ABI v.1..
It’s hard to gain interest when certain people keep spreading completely false information about it.
-
(There are no interest in ABI v.1) i dont think thats true, if someone create a ABI v.1 Distro like icaros/aspireOS and nicely polished design and silky look and amiga feeling. Users will try and people will restart compiling what ever they compiled for ab1_v.0 for ABI v.1..
Here's one. As polished as I could. Both native/hosted mode work (at least for Linux).
https://vmwaros.blogspot.com/p/64-bit.html
-
(There are no interest in ABI v.1) i dont think thats true, if someone create a ABI v.1 Distro like icaros/aspireOS and nicely polished design and silky look and amiga feeling. Users will try and people will restart compiling what ever they compiled for ab1_v.0 for ABI v.1..
It’s hard to gain interest when certain people keep spreading completely false information about it.
What exactly is the false information about?
-
(There are no interest in ABI v.1) i dont think thats true, if someone create a ABI v.1 Distro like icaros/aspireOS and nicely polished design and silky look and amiga feeling. Users will try and people will restart compiling what ever they compiled for ab1_v.0 for ABI v.1..
It’s hard to gain interest when certain people keep spreading completely false information about it.
Like that Intel's SGX extensions are needed to help debugging multi-threaded applications?
-
Hi. I tried building a Ubuntu-based virtual machine which easily allow to compile abiv1-64 executables from Linux. Look for it in Icaros Desktop's website.
Yes, I know. Thank you, but this is not a toolchain and does not integrate into my existing development environment, so I put off testing this method for now. :D
To be honest, though, the high curiosity about Icaros 64 was followed by the total lack of interest by 3rd party coders, who, with a couple of exceptions, completely avoided compiling things for 64bit architecture.
I'm sure the reasons are the same as mine.
Moreover, most of the programs you see on the Archives, although compiled for x64-aros, are NOT compatible anymore and nobody cares about this, neither aros developers, nor applications ones.
It's much worse. Most of these programs are'nt compiled at all for x64-aros. ;D For example (http://archives.aros-exec.org/index.php?function=comments&file=development/cross/x86_64-aros-gcc-4.5.2-cygwin-i386.tar.bz2#1). Yes, I understand why it happened, but use "file" in Linux..
So I wonder what the hell we're doing here. I don't like spending my time, money and efforts on something nobody cares about. So I turned back to my old cheer ABIv0 32-bit icaros and put the 64 bit version in the fridge. Better times will come, to bring it back to attention. At least I still have some real USER that enjoys what I do.
This is expected and logical
You can't attract developers if you continue repeating they will need to recompile their software over and over again.
You can't even attract the one-time casual dev, if AROS 64's gcc doesnt even work
and you definitely can't attract USERS, if you don't bring APPLICATIONS.
Unfortunately, this is generally unrealistic, a certain number of man-hours were spent on 1412 packages in the archive (this is very little, but all that we could). Even if you consider that not all of this is an applications, a lot still needs attention. Open software culture is not typical on Amiga and this has only begun to change in recent years. Therefore, for most applications there is no source code, including those that are in the archive. Proprietary applications for m68k-Amiga written in assembler for AROS are generally lost. You can recompile two dozen applications that will not be enough for work. Before that you need to recompile the libraries, for example, SDL, SSL, etc. Here there are no people versed in cryptography, I myself passed only next to this topic. Therefore, we will forget about cryptography in AROS applications for now. Along with this and about applications that require secure network connections.
All have a SDL libraries of varying degrees of curvature (so no one uploads their versions). A somehow working ncurses relies on SDL, for example. It takes a lot of patches for this to work in an Amiga environment, which is low-level work. You can't just take and compile. Although as a first approximation with POSIX everything is good, in practice, elementary things are missing in ABIv0 (!). For example, it's good if you know about this repository (https://github.com/BSzili/aros-stuff). Although this solution to only a few problems is incompatible with future AROS. We are also limited by memory from above, do not forget about it. And after that we say that we need to recompile everything, but the stable version of ABIv1 is being postponed for now.
-
Unfortunately, this is generally unrealistic, a certain number of man-hours were spent on 1412 packages in the archive (this is very little, but all that we could). Even if you consider that not all of this is an applications, a lot still needs attention. Open software culture is not typical on Amiga and this has only begun to change in recent years. Therefore, for most applications there is no source code, including those that are in the archive. Proprietary applications for m68k-Amiga written in assembler for AROS are generally lost. You can recompile two dozen applications that will not be enough for work. Before that you need to recompile the libraries, for example, SDL, SSL, etc. Here there are no people versed in cryptography, I myself passed only next to this topic. All have a SDL libraries of varying degrees of curvature (so no one uploads their versions). A somehow working ncurses relies on SDL, for example. It takes a lot of patches for this to work in an Amiga environment, which is low-level work. You can't just take and compile. Although as a first approximation with POSIX everything is in order, in practice, elementary things are missing in ABIv0 (!). For example, it's good if you know about this repository (https://github.com/BSzili/aros-stuff). Although this solution to only a few problems is incompatible with future AROS. And after that we say that we need to recompile everything, but the stable version of ABIv1 is being postponed for now.
There aren't any AROS-specific applications written in Assember, since everything that currently runs on x86-Aros is written with a high-level language and then compiled for the x86 architecture. In a ideal world, coder would just keep the sources, place them on a x64-AROS installation and rebuild for it. Real world, however, is far from being ideal. Many legacy applications were compiled when ABIv0 AROS was different than today, building them today would require a review of the code first. The step from 32 to 64 bit architecture, moreover if we keep under consideration the SMP-enabled version, would also require more attention. I perfectly understand this is not something the casual contributor would like to face. But when I say "no software" I don't mean that everything must be recompiled, but at least the bare minimum AROS programs we have: ZuneTools, MPlayer, OWB, AmiStart, all the whole Hollywood plugins and all the libraries they need to work. But if we hadn't even a working toolchain under x64, a working gcc devkit, how can we help ourselves?
-
There aren't any AROS-specific applications written in Assember, since everything that currently runs on x86-Aros is written with a high-level language and then compiled for the x86 architecture.
I correct my english text all the time and may be misunderstood. I wrote about applications for the Amiga, which are not and will not be on AROS, but which make the Amiga attractive. These are trackers, bitmap font editors, editors of music samples in IFF, and even damn Personal Paint (which i love), CEd, GEd, ProgED, etc. Answers to Today's Challenges: which text editors support markdown highlighting, for example? MUI-Vim? I have it constantly falling)))
ZuneTools
Maybe it can be moved quickly
MPlayer
Welcome to AHI (Alsa in original) and other libraries (lame, freetype, etc). Many patches.
OWB
Welcome to AmiSSL
AmiStart
No source?
all the whole Hollywood plugins and all the libraries they need to work
Need to financially interest the authors of Hollywood. Is it possible? No.
-
ABI v0 was just placeholder code. It didn't observe the DRY concept of "don't repeat yourself" by offering true pure residentable executables and libraries. Without that you don't get the full performance that AmigaOS gave in the past. Caches only have to latch on to one copy of things when the DRY concept is observed.
Without the full feature set of AmigaOS, what point is there in having another OS?
Now getting on with the subject of whether I'm testing ABI v1, the answer to that is also no. I think the boat has left the harbor for Amiga-like OS's in general because the need for SMP is vital in the age of multicore CPUs. Is there room for yet another x86 OS when Haiku is better on all fronts other than GPU support?
Regarding Hollywood, if you need to run hosted on top of Linux just to get sufficient drivers to run AROS, why not just run the Linux version of Hollywood?
With AROS SMP, ABI v1 had potential but presently AROS, along with all the rest of the next-gen Amiga platforms, is only useful for nostalgia trips. If it weren't for AmigaOS 4 and MorphOS stealing the thunder of AROS, there might have been a chance. As it stands there is no chance for any of them.
I still crank up my old Amigas every now and then or FS-UAE sometimes but those days are becoming less and less frequent. My MorphOS-based Mac Mini is occasionally started for running Hollywood on and testing. My MicroA1 is started as an idle curiosity sometimes. AROS is started even less frequently yet.
Why are we sticking with our Amigas in this day and age but to stick it to Microsoft, Apple and the like? They are almost ready to shift to Linux once WebAssembly catches on as a standard. Once that happens all compatibility arguments will fall flat and capability will once again shine. Aros lacks capability compared to the likes of Haiku, as I mentioned earlier, and WebAssembly requires a largely POSIX compliant ecosystem to implement.
The opportunity for small, streamlined OS's to shine is coming soon and sadly, we aren't ready for it.
-
Samurai_Crow: This is not about taking over the world. It is a powerful, cheap alternative to other NG Amiga Operative systems.
People have fun with C-64, Atari, Amiga classic and there is a lot of fun that can had with AROS. It is a hobby you can learn a lot from. I would not know anything near as much about computing if it was not for AROS. I enjoy using it and enjoy any progress made to it. There is a lot of software where AROS do just as well as any other Operative system. It is not that you need SMP, and the worlds best computer to run a calculator ;) It is just to put things into perspective. My laptop is still core2duo using Peppermint 64-bit, no plan to upgrade. I play games mostly on C-64 and Amiga, that is where most of my favorite games are. I have a powerful Intel computer with Nvidia where I can play Dirt Rally II etc. but I do not use it much.
-
@nikos
I ran Debian on my Core 2 Duo based Mac Mini for years using the LXDE desktop similar to your Peppermint Linux laptop. I've since cross-graded to a G4 PPC Mac Mini to run MorphOS. It runs great for a single threaded OS, but I'd never think of running a single-threaded OS on my second- or third-gen i7. It would leave too many threads idle. That's why I don't advocate running Aros on modern hardware at all. If Aros SMP took off, it might have been different.
-
@nikos
I ran Debian on my Core 2 Duo based Mac Mini for years using the LXDE desktop similar to your Peppermint Linux laptop. I've since cross-graded to a G4 PPC Mac Mini to run MorphOS. It runs great for a single threaded OS, but I'd never think of running a single-threaded OS on my second- or third-gen i7. It would leave too many threads idle. That's why I don't advocate running Aros on modern hardware at all. If Aros SMP took off, it might have been different.
Yes, I understand that. Running AROS native require some old supported hardware. I would never run AROS native in VESA mode, no matter how many cores I had supported. For new computers you can run hosted, but still no accelerated GFX, so it is a dead end for me. For development it can be nice.
-
Hi,
I rarely commented here (mostly active on 68k related platforms) :)
generally I would not be that pessimistic... Aros is used today by many users on 68k (V2 and V4) perhaps there is a chance to use that for the "bigger platforms". I remember when all sort of people explained me why aros and alsways will be a waste of time, nobody will ever be interested in and nobody will ever use it as main platform. And that is exactly happening now. It happens because it works (on 68k) as a good replacement for 3.1, it behaves like 3.1 and much of the old software also works. Of course that cannot easily transferred to ABI1 (I would say with limited resources you should concentrate on one platform) but from a user point of view it should be as easy as possible and as similar to what people expect (amiga) as possible. Easy means to me there must be real reference hardware where it is possible even for unexperienced users to install and configure the OS. The hardware must be fully supported out of the box. Additionally Amiga users expect something amiga-like and want to run the old software so you need integrated 68k emulation. AROS should look & feel like Amiga did. Alternative you can try to attract other users but that is more difficult in my view.
So in short... if possible not separate platforms (ABI 0 and 1) but only one to get new developments but also testing as quick as possible and few selected modern hardware that is full supported (also f.e. RPi on ARM)
-
Olaf. The way of mind is one. I have expressed this too. Actually, what needs to be done for now is to prepare an Aros equipment list. An extremely common computer such as intel or amd, nvdia rtx 2060, realtek audio, intel wireless and bluetooth, and almost every user commonly owns it. and starting from here and showing itself in the real world should be the goal of Aros.
-
We already have this.
ACER aspire one 110 or Zg5 (same model).
For something more powerful I'm using DELL latitiude D520 laptop. What is needed is to change the wi-fi chip. It should for most be quite easy.
This laptop came in 3 different versions. I have changed the CPU on the 2 DELL laptops I have. I got the CPU on ebay for very little money. They all run Core2Duo 2GHz now. 1 or them I installed Peppermint the other AROS i386 ABI v.0.
Sure possible to have both operative systems on the same computer. Great laptops, with 2GHz core2duo they support 64-bit and both operative systems work fast and reliable.
-
I am aware of that... perhaps not enough promoted or not "sexy" enough for some users. Generally the way to go in my view. And as I wrote in another thread... Amiga users should feel at home when using aros, and 68k emulation and integration is critical
for me three things are critical:
easy to install and fully support hardware (most users are not able and interested in fiddling around with complex configurations)
Environment must look and behave like amiga
68k integration is critical... there must be no difference if you install and use X86 programs/games or 68k, the difference must be hidden
-
I am aware of that... perhaps not enough promoted or not "sexy" enough for some users. Generally the way to go in my view. And as I wrote in another thread... Amiga users should feel at home when using aros, and 68k emulation and integration is critical
for me three things are critical:
easy to install and fully support hardware (most users are not able and interested in fiddling around with complex configurations)
Environment must look and behave like amiga
68k integration is critical... there must be no difference if you install and use X86 programs/games or 68k, the difference must be hidden
Yes, sure a more modern solution would be preferd. Something where you could install at least one more modern operative system. My DELL laptop still kind of suits that bill, but there are some fiddling that most might not want.
Remember this been tried by "ARES" hardware and Stevens "IMica"
I'm sure this could be possible, but it would require a lot of promotion and software worked on.
It is also what I see as the right path to really kickstart AROS.
-
68k integration is critical... there must be no difference if you install and use X86 programs/games or 68k, the difference must be hidden
This isn't possible on architectures which aren't 32-bit AND big-endian (e.g.: PowerPC, or ARM32 running in big-endian mode).
-
it is not possible in a "petunia!" way but at least UAE integration should be as tight and transparent as possible
-
68k integration is critical... there must be no difference if you install and use X86 programs/games or 68k, the difference must be hidden
This isn't possible on architectures which aren't 32-bit AND big-endian (e.g.: PowerPC, or ARM32 running in big-endian mode).
You are right. It will never be transparent but it can get way better than it is now. A ready set up solution where partitions and the system is ready to run 68k software. I did that with AspireOS but the emulator is not on level with WinUAE and that is what it should, must be.
-
Emu68 will run hosted on AArch64 (ARM64 bit) but it requires an FPGA for chipset emulation. It's also by Dr. Michal Schulz, the author of Arix.
-
it is not possible in a "petunia!" way but at least UAE integration should be as tight and transparent as possible
Do you mean like WinUAE which is sharing some resources (filesystem, networking, ...) from the host to the emulated environment?
You are right. It will never be transparent but it can get way better than it is now. A ready set up solution where partitions and the system is ready to run 68k software. I did that with AspireOS but the emulator is not on level with WinUAE and that is what it should, must be.
That's fine: the WinUAE model is, obviously, possible.
But requires development on both AROS and UAE side: who'll do that?
Emu68 will run hosted on AArch64 (ARM64 bit) but it requires an FPGA for chipset emulation. It's also by Dr. Michal Schulz, the author of Arix.
I don't think that he's interested on any form of chipset emulation, but it's more like running o.s. applications as fast as possible. Chipset emulation will be reduced to the bare minimum to make it work, more or less like the Draco and (especially) Amithlon. That's the idea which I came-up looking at his work.
More complete chipset emulation is totally non-sense, since there's already WinUAE which is the best piece of software in this area.
-
I am aware of that... perhaps not enough promoted or not "sexy" enough for some users. Generally the way to go in my view. And as I wrote in another thread... Amiga users should feel at home when using aros, and 68k emulation and integration is critical
for me three things are critical:
easy to install and fully support hardware (most users are not able and interested in fiddling around with complex configurations)
Environment must look and behave like amiga
68k integration is critical... there must be no difference if you install and use X86 programs/games or 68k, the difference must be hidden
Something like this, you mean?
https://vmwaros.blogspot.com/p/amibridge.html (https://vmwaros.blogspot.com/p/amibridge.html)
If you're aiming at something better integrated, well: that's NOT possible on x86 or x64.
-
Emu68 will run hosted on AArch64 (ARM64 bit) but it requires an FPGA for chipset emulation. It's also by Dr. Michal Schulz, the author of Arix.
Emu68 will run on whatever Michal ports it to(hint there's no guarantee it's just ARM). Also, he had no intention to personally implement it with an FPGA for the chipset(Not saying it couldn't be used). Also, it's not "hosted" it's a bare metal CPU emulator with no underlying OS.
-
Just answering the original question, I'd be happy to test ABIv1 wherever time permits (like right now). Actually I just tried the nightly ISOs for x86 and x86_64 but both died early in the boot process.
-
I'd like to help too.
-
I will try to test the raspberry version on a regular basis to make progress reports (from my point of view).
I saw today that there was also in the ABI-v1 Developer Tools section
the Linux-gnu-raspi-armhf-toolchain
Linux GNU crosscompiler for AROS ARM target
the developers want us to test the manufacturing of the assembly as well?
I will also be interested in it, because I would learn a lot, even if I certainly couldn't help the developers.
-
I'm testing ABIv1 as it relates to projects I'm working on.
We (bsek) just fixed some Wanderer issues for copying and renaming that was unknown problems till recently.