f



OS Programmers

Are there any C/C++/Assembler programmers here ?
Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested
in writing a new OS. I don't have a name for it yet.
So if there are any suggestions for a name give it a shot
0
wolfbyte (6)
8/17/2004 10:28:42 AM
comp.os.linux 3406 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

12 Replies
989 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 35

Wolfbyte wrote:

> Are there any C/C++/Assembler programmers here ?
> Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested
> in writing a new OS. I don't have a name for it yet.
> So if there are any suggestions for a name give it a shot

I'm a C and assembler programmer.

Let me give you some advice.  Unless you have a pretty good idea about 
how to make an OS that is better than Linux, don't bother.  To be sure, 
linux has some faults (compatibility with the NTFS file system leaps to 
mind), but those can be fixed.   Work on Linux, instead.  Unless you 
have an idea for an OS that is significantly better - in which case we'd 
like to know what your idea is and why it is significantly better.

How will your OS be better than linux?  Will it run on platforms Linux 
doesn't run on (seems unlikely)?  Will it be more efficient (efficiency 
is the measure of how much RAM and CPU cycles are consumed by the OS to 
support running the applications).  Will it be easier to install?  Look 
at Hurd.  Hurd's been around for a while, and nobody uses it.

Remember that it isn't enough to build an OS; you also have to find 
applications to run under it.  Probably the easiest way to do that is to 
ensure that your OS is POSIX compliant.  But that isn't very 
challenging: Windows/NT is POSIX compliant.

Sorry to rain on your parade - I just think you are wasting time.


Jeff


-1
STOPSPAMNOW
8/17/2004 3:34:42 PM
So what are you saying ? Are you saying I could better
try to make a good linux distro unless I know what I am doing ?

@STOPSPAMNOW.commercialventvac .com > wrote:

> Wolfbyte wrote:
> 
>> Are there any C/C++/Assembler programmers here ?
>> Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested
>> in writing a new OS. I don't have a name for it yet.
>> So if there are any suggestions for a name give it a shot
> 
> 
> I'm a C and assembler programmer.
> 
> Let me give you some advice.  Unless you have a pretty good idea about 
> how to make an OS that is better than Linux, don't bother.  To be sure, 
> linux has some faults (compatibility with the NTFS file system leaps to 
> mind), but those can be fixed.   Work on Linux, instead.  Unless you 
> have an idea for an OS that is significantly better - in which case we'd 
> like to know what your idea is and why it is significantly better.
> 
> How will your OS be better than linux?  Will it run on platforms Linux 
> doesn't run on (seems unlikely)?  Will it be more efficient (efficiency 
> is the measure of how much RAM and CPU cycles are consumed by the OS to 
> support running the applications).  Will it be easier to install?  Look 
> at Hurd.  Hurd's been around for a while, and nobody uses it.
> 
> Remember that it isn't enough to build an OS; you also have to find 
> applications to run under it.  Probably the easiest way to do that is to 
> ensure that your OS is POSIX compliant.  But that isn't very 
> challenging: Windows/NT is POSIX compliant.
> 
> Sorry to rain on your parade - I just think you are wasting time.
> 
> 
> Jeff
> 
> 
1
wolfbyte (6)
8/17/2004 5:11:09 PM
> Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested in writing a new
> OS.

Just what we need another platform for big companies to whine and b***h
about not being able to find anyone with 20 years experience on.  And
therefor justify to some .gov agency that they have no choice but to
import cheap labor, and/or ship the whole shop overseas.

On the other side of that we're finally reaching the possibility of Win95
programmers with 10+ years experience.  Does that mean those jobs will
come home again? Since this seemed to be a common job requirement in 1998.

Shadow_7

0
wwwShadow7 (310)
8/17/2004 9:23:51 PM
@STOPSPAMNOW.commercialventvac .com wrote:

> (compatibility with the NTFS file system leaps to mind)

.... personally, and i know a lot of people would
agree, who CARES if it supports it :)
..
-- 
<<   http://michaeljtobler.homelinux.com/   >>
College is like a woman -- you work so hard to get in,
and nine months later you wish you'd never come.

0
mjtobler2 (1165)
8/17/2004 10:38:54 PM
Wolfbyte wrote:

> Are there any C/C++/Assembler programmers here ?
> Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested
> in writing a new OS. I don't have a name for it yet.
> So if there are any suggestions for a name give it a shot

Sorry that I don't know any programming. But try to follow your dream
whatever people say. If it doesn't work out, well then you at least gave it
a try!

Micke
0
8/19/2004 5:26:53 AM
On Tue, 17 Aug 2004 19:11:09 +0200, Wolfbyte wrote:

> So what are you saying ? Are you saying I could better
> try to make a good linux distro unless I know what I am doing ?

What I am saying is that unless you have an idea that makes your proposed
OS significantly better than anything else around, you should probably
direct your efforts to other projects which need help.  However, if you do
have an idea that you think is significantly better, then all of us would
really like to know what that idea is, how it would work, and why you
think it is better than anything hitherto available.  Remember that there
are a gadzillion person-hours invested in the Linux kernel.

Our next question, of course, would be something like "Gee, that's a great
idea - can we implement it in Linux?".

Now, there are some great ideas that just can't be implemented in Linux. 
For example, OpenVMS has a component of the OS called Record Management
Services, which allows record locking in the OS.  That can't be done in
Linux because Linux doesn't know what a record is.  Record locking in the
OS solves a whole bunch of problems, but it just ain't ever gonna happen
in Linux.


Sincerely yours,


Jeff Silverman



> 
> @STOPSPAMNOW.commercialventvac .com > wrote:
> 
>> Wolfbyte wrote:
>> 
>>> Are there any C/C++/Assembler programmers here ?
>>> Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested
>>> in writing a new OS. I don't have a name for it yet.
>>> So if there are any suggestions for a name give it a shot
>> 
>> 
>> I'm a C and assembler programmer.
>> 
>> Let me give you some advice.  Unless you have a pretty good idea about 
>> how to make an OS that is better than Linux, don't bother.  To be sure, 
>> linux has some faults (compatibility with the NTFS file system leaps to 
>> mind), but those can be fixed.   Work on Linux, instead.  Unless you 
>> have an idea for an OS that is significantly better - in which case we'd 
>> like to know what your idea is and why it is significantly better.
>> 
>> How will your OS be better than linux?  Will it run on platforms Linux 
>> doesn't run on (seems unlikely)?  Will it be more efficient (efficiency 
>> is the measure of how much RAM and CPU cycles are consumed by the OS to 
>> support running the applications).  Will it be easier to install?  Look 
>> at Hurd.  Hurd's been around for a while, and nobody uses it.
>> 
>> Remember that it isn't enough to build an OS; you also have to find 
>> applications to run under it.  Probably the easiest way to do that is to 
>> ensure that your OS is POSIX compliant.  But that isn't very 
>> challenging: Windows/NT is POSIX compliant.
>> 
>> Sorry to rain on your parade - I just think you are wasting time.
>> 
>> 
>> Jeff
>> 
>>

0
jeffs2965 (23)
8/19/2004 6:04:16 AM
mjt wrote:

> @STOPSPAMNOW.commercialventvac .com wrote:
> 
>> (compatibility with the NTFS file system leaps to mind)
> 
> ... personally, and i know a lot of people would
> agree, who CARES if it supports it :)

There are a lot of people currently running Windows who are potential Linux
users; *THEY* care a lot. As someone who would like to see more people
switch to Linux, I care.

Do I need to use NTFS in Linux? No ... but I can see beyond my own needs.

0
PAM1 (26)
8/19/2004 5:22:37 PM
Michael Satterwhite wrote:

>> ... personally, and i know a lot of people would
>> agree, who CARES if it supports it :)
> 
> There are a lot of people currently running Windows who are potential Linux
> users; THEY care a lot. As someone who would like to see more people
> switch to Linux, I care.

.... but NTFS is a moving target, so why should someone
take their time to CONTINUE to reverse engineer it so
that a few folks can R/W to NTFS from Linux?  

there are two very good solutions for sharing data
between Linux and winders:
* create a fat32
* use a virtual machine (or crossover)

Linux developers need to focus their time on Linux
specific filesystems, not a moving target for some 
other platform
-- 
<<   http://michaeljtobler.homelinux.com/   >>
Q:  Where can you buy black lace crotchless panties for sheep?
A:  Fredrick's of Ithaca, New York.

0
mjtobler2 (1165)
8/19/2004 5:42:12 PM
mjt wrote in message

> ... but NTFS is a moving target, so why should someone
> take their time to CONTINUE to reverse engineer it so

Nobody is reverse engineer NTFS for a long time. No need for it. NTFS
has changed only slightly over the last 10 years and the rewritten
Linux NTFS code works perfectly fine from NT4 through XP and 2003 to
even Longhorn beta.

The problem isn't the need to reverse engineering the new things
(there is nothing important) but to IMPLEMENT, under the GPL licence,
all the needed bits for FULL write support. NTFS is very complex. It's
said to be 20 times harder to implement than FAT32. Something like
Reiser4 or XFS. But only one or two guys are working on it and only in
their spare time. Versus 8-10 full-time paid engineers for Reiser4 or
XFS.

> that a few folks can R/W to NTFS from Linux?  

I doubt it would be only a few. A SUSE manager said recently in an
interview that half of their customers needs Windows compatibility.
I've heard even higher numbers for Mandrake. There are some hundred
million Windows users using NTFS and most won't throw away Windows
immediately but migrate gradually.

> there are two very good solutions for sharing data
> between Linux and winders:
> * create a fat32
> * use a virtual machine (or crossover)

  * Captive NTFS - doing the Wine way and it's free, GPL.
  * Paragon NTFS for Linux - commercial but I've never tried.
0
szcs (51)
8/20/2004 2:21:57 AM
On 19 Aug 2004 19:21:57 -0700, szcs@abuse.co.uk (Sz. Csetey) wrote:

[snippage]

>> there are two very good solutions for sharing data
>> between Linux and winders:
>> * create a fat32
>> * use a virtual machine (or crossover)
>
>  * Captive NTFS - doing the Wine way and it's free, GPL.

And according to the author, it might or might not work with kernel
2.6.x and he won't support it.

>  * Paragon NTFS for Linux - commercial but I've never tried.

I bought it.  Buggy trash with no support.

Mike-

--
If you're not confused, you're not trying hard enough.
--
Please note - Due to the intense volume of spam, we have installed 
site-wide spam filters at catherders.com.  If email from you bounces,
try non-HTML, non-encoded, non-attachments,
0
cocke (411)
8/20/2004 3:57:07 AM
mjt wrote:

> Michael Satterwhite wrote:
> 
>>> ... personally, and i know a lot of people would
>>> agree, who CARES if it supports it :)
>> 
>> There are a lot of people currently running Windows who are potential
>> Linux users; THEY care a lot. As someone who would like to see more
>> people switch to Linux, I care.
> 
> ... but NTFS is a moving target, so why should someone
> take their time to CONTINUE to reverse engineer it so
> that a few folks can R/W to NTFS from Linux?
> 
> there are two very good solutions for sharing data
> between Linux and winders:
> * create a fat32
> * use a virtual machine (or crossover)
> 
> Linux developers need to focus their time on Linux
> specific filesystems, not a moving target for some
> other platform

It has always amused me that support for FAT32 is better than that for UFS,
considering UFS is open source.
0
pmcdonnell (25)
8/20/2004 7:01:21 AM
Wolfbyte wrote:

> Are there any C/C++/Assembler programmers here ?
> Because i'm looking for programmers who are interested
> in writing a new OS. I don't have a name for it yet.
> So if there are any suggestions for a name give it a shot

I don't know any, but maybe you have access to a few dozen politician ?
I want to design a new form of government.


-- 
J

All your bits are belong to us - again.
0
not2892 (107)
8/22/2004 3:28:16 PM
Reply: