Mail Archives: opendos/1997/05/12/11:47:10
On Mon, 12 May 1997, Mr M S Aitchison wrote:
> 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.
I don't think this is a primary objective. This is *exactly* FreeDOS goal
and it is the reason the FreeDOS project will carry on even if OpenDOS and
its sources are now available. They heard OpenDOS will become a
state-of-the-art OS, 32-bit and everything and since it is not what they
want/need (an OS that'll run on all the PC), it's not stopping. From the
FreeDOS FAQ:
2.2 What will FreeDOS not be?
FreeDOS will not be multitasking. It will not be object oriented. It
will not include a Graphical Interface, a flat memory model, or
operate in 32-bit protected mode.
> 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.
This one is rather easy. The DOS platform as it is today is such a
braindead piece of software, not very hard to emulate...
> 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).
What do you think: let's keep our fingers away from COMMAND.COM (except
for debugging purposes) and make a whole new shell either derived from
this one or made from scratch, so that new users will have the choice to
have a "normal" COMMAND.COM or a better one...
> 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).
Wholeheartedly agreed!
> 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.
LFNs and a built-in TCP/IP stack would be extra nice, but futuristic
things like object-orientation, while very interesting, will make for a
weird OS that won't be quite your regular DOS anymore!
> 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.
Yes! That's one of the things preventing the inclusion of things like
object-oriented file systems... It's going to be so alien to a "normal OS"
that it won't be interoperable... X is broken IMHO, but the principle of
client/server is nice... Take a look at NeWS from Sun, much better!
> 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".
SMP is probably not needed. If you need an operating for a SMP computer,
by all mean, go with Linux-SMP! OpenDOS shall be the perfect client
workstation operating system, with high performance on current popular
systems (that mean Intel 32-bit single processor) and leave the serving
end to the "big boys"... Note that being multiuser is just as important on
a client machine!
Pierre Phaneuf
- Raw text -