osfree.org

#661 From: "Thomas Lee Mullins" <jerseywarp@...>
Date: Thu Mar 20, 2003 11:27 pm
Subject: PMFree? tomleem7659
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


http://sourceforge.net/projects/frepm

Does anyone know more about this? Has it
been abandoned? Is it still being worked
on? IIRC - it was a clone of OS/2's
presentation manager. There is still
nothing to download at this site (above).

TomLeeM

#662 From: "Thomas Lee Mullins" <jerseywarp@...>
Date: Thu Mar 20, 2003 11:28 pm
Subject: OSFree Site? tomleem7659
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


The OSFree web site has not changed in
almost a year. Is it still be supported
or updated by anyone? Is this a reflection
of the progress of this project? Does anyone
know more about it?

TomLeeM

#663 From: "Thomas Lee Mullins" <jerseywarp@...>
Date: Tue Mar 25, 2003 4:25 pm
Subject: Re: PMFree? tomleem7659
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


--- In osFree@yahoogroups.com, "Thomas Lee Mullins" <jerseywarp@o...>
wrote:
> http://sourceforge.net/projects/frepm
>
> Does anyone know more about this? Has it
> been abandoned? Is it still being worked
> on? IIRC - it was a clone of OS/2's
> presentation manager. There is still
> nothing to download at this site (above).
>
> TomLeeM

If you go to the forum at the FreePM site,
you will see that there is a posting that it
is still being worked on (a reply to a post
that I put there asking about news).

TomLeeM

#664 From: John P Baker <jbaker314@...>
Date: Mon Mar 31, 2003 4:35 am
Subject: Specifications jbakersc
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


I have been a lurker on this group for a while. It seems that the
effort is for
the most part stalled. And it appears to me that this situation is due
in large
measure to attempting to develop code without adequately documenting
what it is that you want to do.

Would it not be better to define a specific set of goals, document those
goals,
publish a specification, and then dole out specific development tasks ?

The successful projects that I have looked at have taken this approach.

Perhaps it is time to step back and take another look at what it is that you
want to do.

John P Baker

#665 From: "Lynn H. Maxson" <lmaxson@...>
Date: Mon Mar 31, 2003 9:03 am
Subject: Re: Specifications lynnmaxson
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


Had you sent this to FreeOS instead of OSFree your suggestion
might fall on more receptive ears. To document means first to
discuss. To discuss in detail to a degree to where you will not
have to re-document, i.e. re-specify, because you didn't go
the necessary (and sufficient) detail level.

For those who like to code first and document later such
discussions seem interminable, an end into themselves. The
writing and language skills for documenting and coding differ
greatly. Great coders are seldom great documenters. Good
coders are seldom good documenters. It's an attitude problem.

It's not a chicken or egg issue about which comes first.
Certain disciplines like literate programming attempt to meld
both code and text into a single hypertext document with a
reading order based on the needs of the reader, i.e. different
paths for different travelers.

Successful(?) projects start with a detail set of specifications.
Third generation languages require analysis, one, to determine
if the specifications cross some necessary threshold to form a
system, and, two, an ordering of the specifications. This
analysis is followed by a design in which the decomposition
into modular units occurs. This modular units then represent
assignable tasks.

Fourth generation languages, those invoking logic
programming, require neither the manual analysis and design
of third generation. These two activities occur within the first
stage or completeness proof of the two-stage logic engine.
The second stage is the exhaustive true/false proof. This
exhaustive true/false proof using predicate logic allows the
software to automatically generate all the necessary test
data.

What this means is that in fourth generation languages you
need only write and accumulate specifications in random order
allowing the software itself, again as part of the
completeness proof, to visually indicate the complete and
incomplete logic intrinsic to the set of unordered
specifications.

Thus no manual decomposition occurs or is necessary as this
function occurs automatically in the software, once again in
the completeness proof. The problem obviously lies in the
open source communities reliance on third generation
languages like C, C++, JAVA, Perl, PHP, and Python without
taking the next step to move these languages from third to
fourth generation.

To make this move you need to offer reuse at the statement
level or at some statement group level, e.g. if...then...else..., do
while..., do until..., do loop..., select...when...when...otherwise...,
etc., below the procedure or methods group. That means
assigning a name to each statement and statement group
either manually as part of code writing or automatically by
the software based on content. As you have two means of
reuse, one through sharable reuse, e.g. API, and the other
through replication, e.g. #include, it means allowing either to
occur as an option for each use instance: context or
meta-programming based.

If you are unwilling to accept that the limits of third
generation languages lie at the heart of the problem, those
limits requiring the manual writing of separate source and
source languages for specification, analysis, design, coding,
and testing, then it makes no sense to talk about creating a
"cover set" of documentation, a separate form of source
writing to stay in sync with these when we consume extra
time and effort in keeping them in sync in practice.

The truth is that using a fourth generation language one
needs only to write specifications, one formal source code,
and write one set of logically equivalent, informal or
descriptive source text. Thus you have only two sources, one
formal, one informal to maintain. You have no need to
disassociate the informal description of a specification from its
formal. Thus you have the basic ingredients for literate
programming. Maintenance says that you only have to change
the informal description of a formal specification at the level
of that specification. That level can be from the statement
level on up.

The association says that an editor not only presents the
source code but also the associated descriptive text. That
says that you are using something other than a file system, i.e.
a database system, for the storage and retrieval of code and
text. You don't have an editor that does this nor do you have
a compiler which will accept both on input.

I would suggest that you rethink how we currently do things
to get to the point from specification to decomposition to see
this as part of the problem. Once you realise that the current
set of tools place these limits on us and what changes we
need to them to no longer have the limits, you will change the
tool set. When you do so then you will have more successful
projects with more successful people with more time left over
for their other lives.

#666 From: "Thomas Lee Mullins" <jerseywarp@...>
Date: Tue Apr 1, 2003 5:34 pm
Subject: REXX/OS? tomleem7659
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


"REXX/OS operating system project reaches first
milestone (Posted by Christian Langanke) (js )
The netlabs.org develpers community proudly
announces a new project called REXX/OS, intended
as the brand new incarnation of the IBM operating
system OS/2, being completely realized using the
widely known and proven REXX scripting language.
As Adrian Gschwend, founder of netlabs.org states,
the project has already reached its first milestone.
The kernel, currently hosted in a virtual OS/2
session, successfully boots and basic device
drivers are available. A first public preview
is available for download from the netlabs.org
website. Considering the potential of this
revolutionary design for the OS/2 community,
netlabs.org is prepared to handle the expected
several dozen downloads of this preview. Several
screenshots have also been posted. See the
REXX/OS homepage at: http://rexxos.netlabs.org.

URL: http://rexxos.netlabs.org "

This was posted at http://en.os2.org on 04-01
(I hope it isn't some kind of 'April Fools Joke').

BigWarpGuy

#667 From: Christoph Schulte Moenting <c.s.m@...>
Date: Tue Apr 1, 2003 5:47 pm
Subject: Re: REXX/OS? tiftofxxx
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


> "REXX/OS operating system project reaches first
> milestone (Posted by Christian Langanke) (js )
>[snip]
> URL: http://rexxos.netlabs.org "
>
> This was posted at http://en.os2.org on 04-01
> (I hope it isn't some kind of 'April Fools Joke').

What else than a joke should it be? It's funny, that's true

Regards,
Christoph

--
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
Bitte lДcheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!

#668 From: "Thomas Lee Mullins" <jerseywarp@...>
Date: Tue Apr 1, 2003 7:02 pm
Subject: Re: REXX/OS? tomleem7659
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


--- In osFree@yahoogroups.com, Christoph Schulte Moenting <c.s.m@g...>
wrote:
> > "REXX/OS operating system project reaches first
> > milestone (Posted by Christian Langanke) (js )
> >[snip]
> > URL: http://rexxos.netlabs.org "
> >
> > This was posted at http://en.os2.org on 04-01
> > (I hope it isn't some kind of 'April Fools Joke').
>
> What else than a joke should it be? It's funny, that's true
>
> Regards,
> Christoph
>
> --
> +++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more http://www.gmx.net +++
> Bitte lДcheln! Fotogalerie online mit GMX ohne eigene Homepage!

If it is only an 'April Fools Joke', then it is an elaborate
one. There is a 10 megabyte file of the beta version of
REXX/OS which can be downloaded. There seems to be nothing
at the site to indicate it is a 'joke' of any kind. I will
check out the file I have downloaded.

BigWarpGuy

#674 From: Ben Ravago <ben.ravago@...>
Date: Mon Apr 14, 2003 10:48 pm
Subject: microkernel news ben_ravago
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


From the DROPS home page at
http://os.inf.tu-dresden.de/drops/


9 Apr 2003
DROPS demo disk available -
We have compiled a DROPS demo floppy image
which can be copied to a floppy and shows you
Fiasco and some of the DROPS components.
See the download page for further information.

2 Apr 2003
Fiasco 1.0 released -
After years of development, Fiasco 1.0 was released.
The Fiasco microkernel is the basis of the DROPS project.
Get more info on the Fiasco pages.

#675 From: "djremya" <djremya@...>
Date: Tue Jul 8, 2003 8:56 pm
Subject: crashing linux os djremya
Offline Offline
Send Email Send Email
Invite to Yahoo! 360° Invite to Yahoo! 360°


can u give some ways of crashing linux os.indicate if attempt can
happen "accidently" or "intentionally" or"due to ignorance