Mail Archives: opendos/1997/05/11/22:21:22
> From goehrigd AT gort DOT canisius DOT edu Fri May 9 23:26:46 1997
>
> Maybe the solution is to just create & bundle in:
> LinuxEMU, a pseudo-UNIX envirionment that allows you to...
> ... Why bother running OD at all.. Answer? Opendos is Smaller...
Well, I think we both don't want DOS to become Linux, and want to
retain DOS advantages in OpenDOS. But if it isn't Linux, what is it?
Somebody (perhaps all of us, perhaps only Caldera) have to settle on at
least a broad idea of what OpenDOS is all about, what it is trying to
be. The trouble, which I tried to convey in earlier messages, is that
OpenDOS is not organised as well as (say) Linux or FreeDOS - it isn't
even clear what is something "we" can decide and what is entirely up to
Caldera.
I'd like a set of design guidelines drawn up, like the following (but
the actual details are up for debate)...
OBJECTIVE 1: Whatever special versions of OpenDOS might come along,
there will always be a plain "vanilla" version that runs
on low-end computers such as an original IBM 256Kb RAM PC.
OBJECTIVE 2: OpenDOS will continue to run old DOS applications; it will
be about as compatible with PC-DOS/MS-DOS as one version
of MSDOS is with another.
OBJECTIVE 3: The setup and on-going administration will be as easy as
possible, and the user interface both ergonomic and
compatibile with traditional COMMAND.COM (if there is any
conflict between convenience and compatibility, the user
should get the option).
OBJECTIVE 4: Security (against viruses, access to private data, and
ability to restore a working system) should be as good as
reasonably possible. This means, at the least, restoring
access rights available under the old Multiuser DRDOS, but
it could go a lot further (especialy virus resistance, not
just detection).
OBJECTIVE 5: Provision of modern conveniences, such as long filenames,
object-orientation, web browsers. It should be easier to
port sources from other systems to OpenDOS than plain DOS,
perhaps in the way that EMX makes it easy to port Unix
sources to OS/2. OpenDOS should not only "keep up with
the Jones", it should be able to get features before most
commercial counterparts.
OBJECTIVE 6: OpenDOS should be the most inter-operable DOS; it should be
happy with Mac/VMS or Unix text files (i.e. not CR-LF), be
able to use industry-standard printing and file sharing
systems without headaches (e.g. should work with
Unix-style permissions on mounted file systems; use
distributed configuration systems like NIS, DNS, NDS). It
should be able to use X11, and even if a low-RAM system is
using a non-X11 standard GUI, the system should be similar
enough to administer.
OBJECTIVE 7: When it comes to high-performance 32-bit facilities and SMP,
it might be best to not try to extend OpenDOS to do do things
Linux has solved already, but to run OpenDOS within Linux
"seemlessly".
To achieve most objectives, it is important to have good fundamental
design decisions early on, like a flexible efficient IFS, and a good
security model (anybody aware of how bad MS's is?).
The last two objectives are probably the most controversial. They
might sound like I'm trying to make OpenDOS into Linux. Notice that I'm
not saying OpenDOS should look and feel like Linux... traditional DOS
users should find it as easy to use as ever. But developers can get a
lot of benefit by not trying to re-invent the wheel - if possible, the
good work that has already been done in Linux should be usable if we
are careful with compatiblity. Ultimately a 32-bit version of OpenDOS
will be great, but I think we need to get the present version running
really well first, and let it work on top of Linux for the benefit of
both those running Linux who want DOS as well as those wanting powerful
features like SMP support and special applications such as firewalls
for DOS. Also, people running large numbers of computers will
appreciate support for industry standards such as DNS and SNMP; again
this need not impact on the way OpenDOS looks and feels to the
end-user. Even those who aren't interested in Unix should be able to
get considerable advantages out of the *good* parts of Unix system
administration ideas.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mark Aitchison, Physics & Astronomy \_ Phone : +64 3 3642-947 a.h. 3371-225
University of Canterbury, </ Fax : +64 3 3642-469 or 3642-999
Christchurch, New Zealand. /) E-mail: phys169 AT csc DOT canterbury DOT ac DOT nz
#include <disclaimer.std> (/'
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Raw text -