osfree.org

#91 From: "poldi42" <poldi42@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:14 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! poldi42
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


> All well defined.
> Only one doubt regarding command line switches: can we add more
> switches, or should we stay with _exactly_ the same switches?
> Also: is it allowed to change the output for a switch?
>
> These questions come from a real example: I'd like to offer myself as
> coder for TREE.EXE (to begin), but the reference implementation is
> nearly unusable. It produces an unreadable output, and it's not very
> useful either. I think it should be changed to produce a tree-like
> output per default (as it is meant to be). What do you think?
>

there might be tools that use / redirect / parse the output of given
programs and expect them to do output in a certain way.

in your example I know of inhouse examples that would be broken.

so, while I share your oppinion about TREE.EXEs usefullness per se,
any additional / better behavior should IMHO only implemented by
indroducing new switches, if at all.

nobody (for sure not me) stops you from doing an xtree.exe as well.

regards,
Carsten

#92 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:16 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Hi JMA,

I forgot one thing: wouldn't it be good to establish a common coding
style? We could choose among the well-established ones (K&R, etc.).
We could also choose a comment style compatible with automatic
documentation tools (any suggestions? doxygen? others?).
Finally, we could choose a scheme for naming variables. The classical
one used in IBM OS/2 Toolkit seems like a good candidate.

Bye

Cris

#93 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:18 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:09:08 +0100, criguada@... wrote:

>Hi JMA,
>
>> - The compiler must be Watcom C/C++ 11.0c (OpenWatcom when its relesed)
>> - The toolkit must be IBM OS/2 Warp toolkit 4.x
>> - All code MUST be written in plan C (no C++) and assembler may only be used
>> if C will not do the trick.
>> - The code must be able to run a as replacement drop in on Warp4. It must
>> support the same command line switches.
>
>All well defined.
>Only one doubt regarding command line switches: can we add more
>switches, or should we stay with _exactly_ the same switches?
>Also: is it allowed to change the output for a switch?
>
To begin with we should try to be fully compatible.

If it breaks peoples ten yeras old batch files then what good is it.
And, PMFORMAT and PMFDISK used the commandline apps to do
the real work. Change the output and they may break.

Our goal is ofcource to build a better OS but we must start with
something that runs the apps and tools we have.


>These questions come from a real example: I'd like to offer myself as
>coder for TREE.EXE (to begin), but the reference implementation is
>nearly unusable. It produces an unreadable output, and it's not very
>useful either. I think it should be changed to produce a tree-like
>output per default (as it is meant to be). What do you think?
>
By default is should output what the eq. Warp 4 tool do.
Then all old batchfiles and apps depending on TREE.EXE will work.

Nothing should stop you from adding a switch though and in the
future, when more people use the osFree version we could very
well change it.




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#94 From: Herwig Bauernfeind <herwig.bauernfeind@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:20 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! taxwarriorfr...
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


"criguada@..." schrieb:

> These questions come from a real example: I'd like to offer myself as
> coder for TREE.EXE (to begin),

There is a perfect TREE replacement (better output, same switch plus
some more switches) in OS2CLU pack from Jonathan de Poyne Pollard.


Herwig

--
+---------------------------------------------------
| Mag. Herwig Bauernfeind - Dfb. J.Bfd. - Accountant
| Martin-Luther-Str.12, A-9300 St.Veit/Glan, Austria
| Telefon: ++43 4212 2028 Telefax: ++43 4212 2028 76
| herwig.bauernfeind@... - Fidonet: 2:313/41.5

#95 From: "maratcolumn1" <marat_khalili@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:20 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! - NONSENSE maratcolumn1
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


> I'm now starting the command line tools team. Our goal is to build
compatible
> versions of the command line tools you find in OS/2 Warp 4.

This is the last (and easiest) thing to do. Where's the free API?
Having API I can rewrite mentioned command-line utilities by myself in
24 hours
without peering at any sources. Take AIXLIKE, GNUTOOLS or any other
set of utilities if you don't like IBMs. Most of the utilities are
non-critical or never used. Programs in OS/2 (unlike UNIX) never use
command line utilities. I don't see any point in this work. This will
not even attract professional programmers 'cause kernel hacking
requires much brighter people.

#96 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:20 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:16:54 +0100, criguada@... wrote:

>Hi JMA,
>
>I forgot one thing: wouldn't it be good to establish a common coding
>style? We could choose among the well-established ones (K&R, etc.).
>We could also choose a comment style compatible with automatic
>documentation tools (any suggestions? doxygen? others?).
>Finally, we could choose a scheme for naming variables. The classical
>one used in IBM OS/2 Toolkit seems like a good candidate.
>
I cannot agree more.

Would it be possible for you to document this in some way so that
aspiring developers will know how to write ?

We should definitly have this on our web and ftp site.




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#97 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:20 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Hi Carsten,

> there might be tools that use / redirect / parse the output of given
> programs and expect them to do output in a certain way.
>
> in your example I know of inhouse examples that would be broken.
>
> so, while I share your oppinion about TREE.EXEs usefullness per se,
> any additional / better behavior should IMHO only implemented by
> indroducing new switches, if at all.

You're right.
If it's OK with JMA, I'll start with TREE.EXE and add a few switches to
make it produce a better output.

Bye

Cris

#98 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Hi JMA,

> >I forgot one thing: wouldn't it be good to establish a common coding
> >style? We could choose among the well-established ones (K&R, etc.).
> >We could also choose a comment style compatible with automatic
> >documentation tools (any suggestions? doxygen? others?).
> >Finally, we could choose a scheme for naming variables. The classical
> >one used in IBM OS/2 Toolkit seems like a good candidate.
> >
> I cannot agree more.
>
> Would it be possible for you to document this in some way so that
> aspiring developers will know how to write ?
>
> We should definitly have this on our web and ftp site.

I'll see what I can do. In the meantime I'll collect info about coding
styles and doc tools, than I'll post a few suggestions here for you to
approve one or the other alternative.

Bye

Cris

#99 From: "JMA" <mail@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:24 pm
Subject: Re: osFree/CMD mailjmase
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


On Wed, 20 Feb 2002 15:12:07 +0100, Herwig Bauernfeind wrote:

>> 5) Someone responsible for coding each tool (I take to to begin with).
>
>You should try to get in contact with authors of OS2CLU03 (OS/2 commandline
utilities) and GNUFUTIL (GNU file
>utilities) in order to eventually get source code from them.
>These two packages have commandline tools for most things needed, however
naming and commandline syntax is different.
>Nevertheless it might be less work to port these than to write from scratch.
>
Go ahead. All the GNUxxxx packages I have seen on hobbes have source code in
them and as long as
we respect their GNU copyright we should use them.

This is important, I think it would be positive if we mixed in a lot of GNU
sources in our project.
It would stop others from reusing it in a way we may not want them to.

Are you able to sign up for developing an app ?




Sincerely

JMA
Development and Consulting

John Martin , jma@...
==================================
Website: http://www.jma.se/
email: mail@...
Phone: 46-(0)70-6278410
==================================

#100 From: "criguada@..." <criguada@...>
Date: Wed Feb 20, 2002 5:30 pm
Subject: Re: Re: Work to do - osFree/CMD - Sign up ! - NONSENSE criguada
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Hi Marat,

> This is the last (and easiest) thing to do. Where's the free API?
> Having API I can rewrite mentioned command-line utilities by myself in
> 24 hours
> without peering at any sources. Take AIXLIKE, GNUTOOLS or any other

What are you talking about? Free API? The API is the OS/2 API, and it
have to be that way if we want to be compatible.
For sure this is the easiest thing to do... but let's start with something.

If you're so smart, than JMA will happily assign all the tools to you,
and we can move on coding somehting more important.

But please no AIXLIKE, GNU tools or the like. We have to have tools that
work like the original ones.

> set of utilities if you don't like IBMs. Most of the utilities are
> non-critical or never used. Programs in OS/2 (unlike UNIX) never use
> command line utilities. I don't see any point in this work. This will

Please read the preceding messages with poldi (Carsten), JMA, and
others. This is NOT true!

Bye

Cris