Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.lang.forth > #36191 > unrolled thread

I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser

Back to article view | Back to comp.lang.forth

Contents

  I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2015-01-31 22:14 -0800
    Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser lynx <rinkasu@kaze.void.null> - 2015-02-01 08:02 +0000
      Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-01 15:46 +0000
    Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-01 15:33 +0000
      Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 08:23 -0800
        Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-02 17:30 +0000
          Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-02 10:47 -0800
            Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-02 19:09 +0000
          Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser lynx <rinkasu@kaze.void.null> - 2015-02-03 00:05 +0000
    Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-02 08:02 -0800
      Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2015-02-02 08:22 -0800
      Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-02 19:36 +0000
        Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-02 12:37 -0800
          Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-04 15:08 +0000
            Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-04 16:41 +0000
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Bill Fruitmaker <fruitbill@what.com> - 2015-02-04 17:02 +0000
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-04 17:14 +0000
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-04 10:17 -0800
                  Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-04 10:29 -0800
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser stephen@mpeforth.com (Stephen Pelc) - 2015-02-04 20:44 +0000
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser anton@mips.complang.tuwien.ac.at (Anton Ertl) - 2015-02-05 15:25 +0000
                  Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser "Alex McDonald" <blog@rivadpm.com> - 2015-02-05 21:10 +0000
        Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-02 14:03 -0800
          Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-02 22:09 +0000
            Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-02 15:27 -0800
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-03 00:43 +0000
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-03 12:34 +0000
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser hughaguilar96@gmail.com - 2015-02-04 19:29 -0800
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-02-05 04:44 +0100
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-04 21:44 -0800
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Marc Olschok <nobody@nowhere.invalid> - 2015-02-08 18:41 +0000
        Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Melzzzzz <mel@zzzzz.com> - 2015-02-02 23:14 +0100
        Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-03 12:31 +0000
          Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-03 12:37 +0000
            Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-03 12:55 +0000
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser Jason Damisch <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> - 2015-02-03 10:49 -0800
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser albert@spenarnc.xs4all.nl (Albert van der Horst) - 2015-02-03 19:31 +0000
    Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, butforthos has no chrome web browser "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-02-07 17:55 +1100
      Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, butforthos has no chrome web browser the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2015-02-06 23:51 -0800
        Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-02-08 15:35 +1100
          Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser Elizabeth D Rather <erather@forth.com> - 2015-02-07 20:58 -1000
            Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> - 2015-02-08 13:19 +0000
            Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-02-08 20:23 +0100
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser visualforth@rocketmail.com - 2015-02-08 14:12 -0800
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-02-09 00:23 +0100
              Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser "HAA" <someone@microsoft.com> - 2015-02-11 11:16 +1100
                Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser Bernd Paysan <bernd.paysan@gmx.de> - 2015-02-11 02:48 +0100
    Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, but forthos has no chrome web browser the_gavino_himself <visphatesjava@gmail.com> - 2015-02-07 00:00 -0800

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

#36305

Bill Fruitmaker <fruitbill@what.com> writes:
>On 2015-02-04, Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> wrote:
>
>>> In the case of Unix, the basic interface was designed by Ken Thompson,
>>> who was (and may still be) pretty good at such things, so the Unix
>>> interface had higher technical merit than the competing OSs had
>
>That's a tough sell. We would have to know which ones you're talking about
>because from here it looks very much like UNIX won because it is free as in
>beer.

You mean, they added Unix interfaces rather than, say OS/360, RSX-11
or VMS interfaces to, e.g., Domain/OS, Mach or L4, because you believe
that Unix was distributed at zero cost?  According to
<ftp://cm.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/licenses.html> even educational
licenses incurred a non-zero cost, although it was not much; I doubt
it was much different for other operating systems of that time, just
like today.

If there is a non-technical reason, it's rather that AT&T had no
hardware of its own to sell, and it was willing to license Unix to
hardware vendors like Sun, HP, Apollo, etc., while licensing VMS was
probably not deemed a good business move both by DEC and by the other
hardware manufacturers, both out of fear of strengthening their
competition.

> If that doesn't convince you then Linux should.

Convince me of what?

>> Desktops no longer require an OS with Word-like applications and files.
>> An example is Office 365; Microsoft's cloud based replacement (at least
>> in the long term) for Word, Outlook email and so on.

There are still OSs needed for that.  Office 365 does not run on bare
hardware.  Indeed it needs an OS on the clients and an OS on the
server, and more rather than less system services than an office suite
needed originally.

- anton
-- 
M. Anton Ertl  http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/home.html
comp.lang.forth FAQs: http://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/forth/faq/toc.html
     New standard: http://www.forth200x.org/forth200x.html
   EuroForth 2014: http://www.euroforth.org/ef14/

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36314

on 05/02/2015 15:25:46,  wrote:
> Bill Fruitmaker <fruitbill@what.com> writes:
>>On 2015-02-04, Alex McDonald <blog@rivadpm.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> In the case of Unix, the basic interface was designed by Ken Thompson,
>>>> who was (and may still be) pretty good at such things, so the Unix
>>>> interface had higher technical merit than the competing OSs had
>>
>>That's a tough sell. We would have to know which ones you're talking about
>>because from here it looks very much like UNIX won because it is free as in
>>beer.
> 
> You mean, they added Unix interfaces rather than, say OS/360, RSX-11
> or VMS interfaces to, e.g., Domain/OS, Mach or L4, because you believe
> that Unix was distributed at zero cost? According to
> <ftp://cm.bell-labs.com/who/dmr/licenses.html> even educational
> licenses incurred a non-zero cost, although it was not much; I doubt
> it was much different for other operating systems of that time, just
> like today.
> 
> If there is a non-technical reason, it's rather that AT&T had no
> hardware of its own to sell, and it was willing to license Unix to
> hardware vendors like Sun, HP, Apollo, etc., while licensing VMS was
> probably not deemed a good business move both by DEC and by the other
> hardware manufacturers, both out of fear of strengthening their
> competition.
> 
>> If that doesn't convince you then Linux should.
> 
> Convince me of what?
> 
>>> Desktops no longer require an OS with Word-like applications and files.
>>> An example is Office 365; Microsoft's cloud based replacement (at least
>>> in the long term) for Word, Outlook email and so on.
> 
> There are still OSs needed for that.  Office 365 does not run on bare
> hardware.  Indeed it needs an OS on the clients and an OS on the
> server, and more rather than less system services than an office suite
> needed originally.

Yes, I meant Windows OS. Office 365 will run on phones that run iOS or
Android.

> 
> - anton

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36235

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 2:36:55 PM UTC-5, empty-buffers wrote:

> In fact, there are interesting attempts to create something different: an
> example can be Kolibri OS. But it's created in assembler 

Thanks for this notion!

Wikipedia has a comparison of open-source operating systems - ForthOS is not mentioned, but Kolibri, being the only OS not written in C. Impressive!

Impressive the screenshots shown at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/KolibriOS !

There is a great chance to add Forth to Kolibri OS, because Forth primitives are normally written in Assembler, too, aren't they? So it should be really easy to port Forth to Kolibri OS (for somebody who knows how to port Forth, of course).

> (and the apps for it). 

Apps can be written in Forth, when Forth is ported to Kolibri!

> As a result we can see, that's incredibly fast and resource-saving,

Fit's perfectly to Forth!

> but of course it's not portable - married to x86 architecture forever 
> (I would rather prefer to see it on ARM, for example)

An ARM version is already being discussed: 
https://www.riscosopen.org/forum/forums/5/topics/2174
"But it's not that simple. A port[ing tool] could translate x86 assembly commands to ARM, but it can't translate x86 hardware to ARM hardware :-) And in OS code you need to talk to hardware, so you will have to rewrite half of the OS from scratch. A porting tool won't help here" Yogev Ezra.
But Forth may help. 

Imaging that: "KolibriOS is known as the only 32-bit multi-task
graphical OS that entirely fits to one 1.44M diskette"

Porting Forth to Kolibri would boost both the Kolibri OS and Forth - Kolibri OS users would get acquainted to Forth and multiply their programming efficiency therefore, and Forth users would have their PC environment - Graphics, I/O - already done. Kolibri applications that include word processor, image viewer, graphical editor, web browser and well over 30 exciting games are already there. Imagine, it needs only a few seconds to start!
http://kolibrios.org

Let's do it!

Cheers,
Dirk.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36236

In comp.lang.forth, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote:

> There is a great chance to add Forth to Kolibri OS, because Forth
> primitives are normally written in Assembler, too, aren't they?  So it
> should be really easy to port Forth to Kolibri OS (for somebody who knows
> how to port Forth, of course).

Actually, I had better idea: to re-create Kolibri from ground up in Forth
- to make it portable. But they seem to be determined to continue their
assembler work, unfortunately. Yes, "unfortunately" - since although their
achievment is really nice, still their choice made Kolibri not portable, and
software creation for Kolibri - they prefer assembler - is time-consuming.
-- 
"Yes, this is the bad end you've come to, and two and two is - as it always
was..." - began Trurl, but just then the machine made a faint, barely audible
croaking noise and said, for the last time: "SEVEN".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36238

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 5:09:20 PM UTC-5, empty-buffers wrote:
> In comp.lang.forth, visualforth.com wrote:
> 
> > There is a great chance to add Forth to Kolibri OS, because Forth
> > primitives are normally written in Assembler, too, aren't they?  So it
> > should be really easy to port Forth to Kolibri OS (for somebody who knows
> > how to port Forth, of course).
> 
> Actually, I had better idea: to re-create Kolibri from ground up in Forth
> - to make it portable. But they seem to be determined to continue their
> assembler work, unfortunately. Yes, "unfortunately" - since although their
> achievment is really nice, still their choice made Kolibri not portable, and
> software creation for Kolibri - they prefer assembler - is time-consuming.
> -- 
> "Yes, this is the bad end you've come to, and two and two is - as it always
> was..." - began Trurl, but just then the machine made a faint, barely audible
> croaking noise and said, for the last time: "SEVEN".

Meanwhile I found at 
https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org2/google/gsoc2014/kolibrios
this:
KolibriOS is a fork of MenuetOS, written almost entirely in FASM (assembly language). However, C, Sphinx C--, C++, Free Pascal, Forth, among other high-level languages and compilers, can also be used in user application development (although FASM is strongly preferred). 

The OS features a rich set of applications that include a word processor, image viewer, graphical editor, textual web browser, and over 30 games. Full FAT12/16/32 and EXT2/3/4 support is implemented, as well as read-only support for NTFS, ISO9660 and XFS. Drivers are written for popular sound, network and graphics cards.
Another source: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kolibri

That means, the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth may be used for application software.

But I had no success in finding a Forth running on Kolibri.
May be they have their own Forth: 
http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Kolibri_tomorrow#Other

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36241

In comp.lang.forth, visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote:

> But I had no success in finding a Forth running on Kolibri.
> May be they have their own Forth: 
> http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Kolibri_tomorrow#Other

If I'm correct, they don't (or "not yet" maybe).

I installed Kolibri on my HDD few months ago to give it a shot - indeed we
may wish Linux (or Windows) to act as quickly. Nice resource-saving OS.
-- 
"Yes, this is the bad end you've come to, and two and two is - as it always
was..." - began Trurl, but just then the machine made a faint, barely audible
croaking noise and said, for the last time: "SEVEN".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36248

In article <64a5d5f3-9008-4762-9fed-384c247811db@googlegroups.com>,
 <visualforth@rocketmail.com> wrote:
>On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 5:09:20 PM UTC-5, empty-buffers wrote:
>> In comp.lang.forth, visualforth.com wrote:
>>
>> > There is a great chance to add Forth to Kolibri OS, because Forth
>> > primitives are normally written in Assembler, too, aren't they?  So it
>> > should be really easy to port Forth to Kolibri OS (for somebody who knows
>> > how to port Forth, of course).
>>
>> Actually, I had better idea: to re-create Kolibri from ground up in Forth
>> - to make it portable. But they seem to be determined to continue their
>> assembler work, unfortunately. Yes, "unfortunately" - since although their
>> achievment is really nice, still their choice made Kolibri not portable, and
>> software creation for Kolibri - they prefer assembler - is time-consuming.
>> --
>> "Yes, this is the bad end you've come to, and two and two is - as it always
>> was..." - began Trurl, but just then the machine made a faint, barely audible
>> croaking noise and said, for the last time: "SEVEN".
>
>Meanwhile I found at
>https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org2/google/gsoc2014/kolibrios
>this:
>KolibriOS is a fork of MenuetOS, written almost entirely in FASM
>(assembly language). However, C, Sphinx C--, C++, Free Pascal, Forth,
>among other high-level languages and compilers, can also be used in user
>application development (although FASM is strongly preferred).
>
>The OS features a rich set of applications that include a word
>processor, image viewer, graphical editor, textual web browser, and over
>30 games. Full FAT12/16/32 and EXT2/3/4 support is implemented, as well
>as read-only support for NTFS, ISO9660 and XFS. Drivers are written for
>popular sound, network and graphics cards.
>Another source: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kolibri
>
>That means, the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth may be
>used for application software.
>
>But I had no success in finding a Forth running on Kolibri.
>May be they have their own Forth:
>http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Kolibri_tomorrow#Other

I'll have a look at porting ciforth. Shouldn't be that hard.

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36293

On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:27:14 PM UTC-7, visua...@rocketmail.com wrote:
> Meanwhile I found at 
> https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org2/google/gsoc2014/kolibrios
> this:
> KolibriOS is a fork of MenuetOS, written almost entirely in FASM (assembly language). However, C, Sphinx C--, C++, Free Pascal, Forth, among other high-level languages and compilers, can also be used in user application development (although FASM is strongly preferred). 
> 
> The OS features a rich set of applications that include a word processor, image viewer, graphical editor, textual web browser, and over 30 games. Full FAT12/16/32 and EXT2/3/4 support is implemented, as well as read-only support for NTFS, ISO9660 and XFS. Drivers are written for popular sound, network and graphics cards.
> Another source: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kolibri
> 
> That means, the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth may be used for application software.
> 
> But I had no success in finding a Forth running on Kolibri.
> May be they have their own Forth: 
> http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Kolibri_tomorrow#Other

I don't follow your logic --- why do you think that the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth may be used for application software?

I considered writing a Forth for Menuet in FASM, but ended up just writing my FASM Forth for Windows, which is where it is right now. I didn't see very many people using Menuet, which is why I lost interest in it --- also, the 64-bit version was closed-source, and my Forth was 64-bit.

I never heard of Kolibri --- the last I heard, the 64-bit Menuet was closed-source and the 32-bit Menuet was open-source --- most people interested in Menuet were writing an OS of their own based on Menuet for academic purposes (most likely one of these became Kolibri) --- nobody seemed interested in writing application programs for Menuet, in FASM, Forth, C or any other language (most of the FASM crowd hate HLLs and C especially). 

Is Kolibri 64-bit or 32-bit? I would only be interested in 64-bit open-source.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36294

On Wed, 4 Feb 2015 19:29:15 -0800 (PST)
hughaguilar96@gmail.com wrote:

> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:27:14 PM UTC-7,
> visua...@rocketmail.com wrote:
> > Meanwhile I found at 
> > https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org2/google/gsoc2014/kolibrios
> > this:
> > KolibriOS is a fork of MenuetOS, written almost entirely in FASM
> > (assembly language). However, C, Sphinx C--, C++, Free Pascal,
> > Forth, among other high-level languages and compilers, can also be
> > used in user application development (although FASM is strongly
> > preferred). 
> > 
> > The OS features a rich set of applications that include a word
> > processor, image viewer, graphical editor, textual web browser, and
> > over 30 games. Full FAT12/16/32 and EXT2/3/4 support is
> > implemented, as well as read-only support for NTFS, ISO9660 and
> > XFS. Drivers are written for popular sound, network and graphics
> > cards. Another source:
> > http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kolibri
> > 
> > That means, the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth
> > may be used for application software.
> > 
> > But I had no success in finding a Forth running on Kolibri.
> > May be they have their own Forth: 
> > http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Kolibri_tomorrow#Other
> 
> I don't follow your logic --- why do you think that the Kolibri
> developers already anticipated that Forth may be used for application
> software?
> 
> I considered writing a Forth for Menuet in FASM, but ended up just
> writing my FASM Forth for Windows, which is where it is right now. I
> didn't see very many people using Menuet, which is why I lost
> interest in it --- also, the 64-bit version was closed-source, and my
> Forth was 64-bit.
> 
> I never heard of Kolibri --- the last I heard, the 64-bit Menuet was
> closed-source and the 32-bit Menuet was open-source --- most people
> interested in Menuet were writing an OS of their own based on Menuet
> for academic purposes (most likely one of these became Kolibri) ---
> nobody seemed interested in writing application programs for Menuet,
> in FASM, Forth, C or any other language (most of the FASM crowd hate
> HLLs and C especially). 
> 
> Is Kolibri 64-bit or 32-bit? I would only be interested in 64-bit
> open-source.
"
At the moment of the fork and when new copyrights were added to almost all files, there were no significant changes. Most of the kernel files were exactly the same, line by line. New copyrigths were practically just added to unmodified kernel files (process management, GUI, TCP/IP, disk drivers, etc).

So, that's the reason why M64 is closed source.

(thread closed)
"
http://board.flatassembler.net/topic.php?t=16822&start=20

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36297

On Wednesday, February 4, 2015 at 10:29:17 PM UTC-5, hughag...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 4:27:14 PM UTC-7, visua...@rocketmail.com 

> I don't follow your logic --- why do you think that the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth may be used for application software?
> Is Kolibri 64-bit or 32-bit? I would only be interested in 64-bit open-source.

That's easy to answer!
At http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kolibri it says:
"KolibriOS is a tiny open-source operating system with a monolithic preemptive kernel and video drivers for 32-bit x86 architecture computers. KolibriOS is a fork of MenuetOS, written entirely in FASM (assembly language). However, C, C++, Free Pascal, Forth, among other high-level languages and compilers, can also be used in application development"

I downloaded the ISO file, and the CD worked immediately without problems.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36392

visualforth@rocketmail.com wrote:
> On Monday, February 2, 2015 at 5:09:20 PM UTC-5, empty-buffers wrote:
> > In comp.lang.forth, visualforth.com wrote:
> > 
> > > There is a great chance to add Forth to Kolibri OS, because Forth
> > > primitives are normally written in Assembler, too, aren't they?  So it
> > > should be really easy to port Forth to Kolibri OS (for somebody who knows
> > > how to port Forth, of course).
> > 
> > Actually, I had better idea: to re-create Kolibri from ground up in Forth
> > - to make it portable. But they seem to be determined to continue their
> > assembler work, unfortunately. Yes, "unfortunately" - since although their
> > achievment is really nice, still their choice made Kolibri not portable, and
> > software creation for Kolibri - they prefer assembler - is time-consuming.
> > -- 
> > "Yes, this is the bad end you've come to, and two and two is - as it always
> > was..." - began Trurl, but just then the machine made a faint, barely audible
> > croaking noise and said, for the last time: "SEVEN".
> 
> Meanwhile I found at 
> https://www.google-melange.com/gsoc/org2/google/gsoc2014/kolibrios
> this:
> KolibriOS is a fork of MenuetOS, written almost entirely in FASM (assembly language). However, C, Sphinx C--, C++, Free Pascal, Forth, among other high-level languages and compilers, can also be used in user application development (although FASM is strongly preferred). 
> 
> The OS features a rich set of applications that include a word processor, image viewer, graphical editor, textual web browser, and over 30 games. Full FAT12/16/32 and EXT2/3/4 support is implemented, as well as read-only support for NTFS, ISO9660 and XFS. Drivers are written for popular sound, network and graphics cards.
> Another source: http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=kolibri
> 
> That means, the Kolibri developers already anticipated that Forth may be used for application software.
> 
> But I had no success in finding a Forth running on Kolibri.
> May be they have their own Forth: 
> http://wiki.kolibrios.org/wiki/Kolibri_tomorrow#Other

I have not followed its latest development, but as far as I remember,
at least older versions of Retroforth are written in fasm. Perhaps that
would be a good candidate for porting to Kolibri.

-- 
Marc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36237

On Mon, 2 Feb 2015 19:36:53 +0000 (UTC)
empty-buffers <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com>
wrote:

> In comp.lang.forth, Jason Damisch wrote:
> 
> > I find it odd that the only available OSes anywhere for anything
> > are C and Unix types.
> 
> Why?
> 
> 1. C has been created to write Unix with it.
> 2. (Almost) everyone use C(whatever) to create software.
> 3. In conclusion: what they should create, if decided to design a new
> OS, if not another Unix-derivative? They use tool designed to create
> Unices!
> 
> I was hoping Haiku shall be different - but no: when I took a peek
> into file hierarchy I clearly recognized the structure and filenames
> I know from Linux.
> 
> In fact, there are interesting attempts to create something
> different: an example can be Kolibri OS. But it's created in
> assembler (and the apps for it).

Looking at FASM forum I found out that Kolibri is fork of 
Menuet OS, which is now closed source because of it.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36247

In article <slrnmcvkeq.d4n.empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@Ferrycy.localdomain>,
empty-buffers  <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> wrote:
>In comp.lang.forth, Jason Damisch wrote:
>
>> I find it odd that the only available OSes anywhere for anything
>> are C and Unix types.
>
>Why?
>
>1. C has been created to write Unix with it.
>2. (Almost) everyone use C(whatever) to create software.
>3. In conclusion: what they should create, if decided to design a new OS,
>   if not another Unix-derivative? They use tool designed to create Unices!
>
>I was hoping Haiku shall be different - but no: when I took a peek into
>file hierarchy I clearly recognized the structure and filenames I know from
>Linux.
>
>In fact, there are interesting attempts to create something different: an
>example can be Kolibri OS. But it's created in assembler (and the apps for
>it). As a result we can see, that's incredibly fast and resource-saving,
>but of course it's not portable - married to x86 architecture forever (I
>would rather prefer to see it on ARM, for example) - and of course we won't
>see many applications for Kolibri very soon, because not much software
>creators will decide to use assembler. E.g. to create usenet-newsreader.

"married to X86 forever" . That is not true. While I create ciforth as
"common Intel Forth" a Forth running on MSDOS MSWINDOWS and Intel Linux.
it turns out not so hard to port it to other architectures.
Dec Alpha I did myself, ARM is under way. So an assembler based architecture
if it is limited to the lowest layer is not impossible to port.
(In fact the lowest layer of linux is still inevitably machine code.)

What you overlook is that the design principle around the holy
trinity  unix-C-(Bourne)sh is so incredible succesful that
once you have seen it it is hard to even imagine something else.
Apple did ... and now they are gravitating toward unix-c-(graphic) sh

The same is true of simple languages like lisp and forth.
There is a saying that a sufficiently powerful application program
has a lisp (or forth) interpreter inside.
Some principle are so basic (like Forth : build a command of a
series of other commands) that it needs more than just a genius,
a paradigm shift and a couple of billion dollars in advertising to
that turn that around.

So Kolibri is a laudable experiment, I wish them luck.
The goal of experiments is to learn something, not to change the
world.

Groetjes Albert
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36249

In comp.lang.forth, Albert van der Horst wrote:

> "married to X86 forever" . That is not true. While I create ciforth as
> "common Intel Forth" a Forth running on MSDOS MSWINDOWS and Intel Linux.
> it turns out not so hard to port it to other architectures.
> Dec Alpha I did myself, ARM is under way. So an assembler based architecture
> if it is limited to the lowest layer is not impossible to port.

Strictly saying: no - but it takes manpower. Actually rewriting everything
from scratch for new machine.

> So Kolibri is a laudable experiment, I wish them luck.
> The goal of experiments is to learn something, not to change the
> world.

What a pity. Actually I was hoping for a change, not just for experimenting.
-- 
"Yes, this is the bad end you've come to, and two and two is - as it always
was..." - began Trurl, but just then the machine made a faint, barely audible
croaking noise and said, for the last time: "SEVEN".

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36250

In article <slrnmd1g96.75h.empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@Ferrycy.localdomain>,
empty-buffers  <empty.buffersYOU-DONT-WANT-THIS@gmail.NEITHER-THIS.com> wrote:
>In comp.lang.forth, Albert van der Horst wrote:
>
>> "married to X86 forever" . That is not true. While I create ciforth as
>> "common Intel Forth" a Forth running on MSDOS MSWINDOWS and Intel Linux.
>> it turns out not so hard to port it to other architectures.
>> Dec Alpha I did myself, ARM is under way. So an assembler based architecture
>> if it is limited to the lowest layer is not impossible to port.
>
>Strictly saying: no - but it takes manpower. Actually rewriting everything
>from scratch for new machine.

Everything from scratch? Let me tell you some recent experiences with porting
to arm. First of, even an assembler forth has all but a few basic words
in high level.

Things like
    POP AX
are changed into
    POP(AX)
by an automatic edit.
Use M4 (or a built in macro facility) to tell that AX is really
register R6.
Poof! All stack juggling like DROP OVER : done.

I could've implement a few very basic words in highlevel as an
alternative: $/ $@ CORA and a switch between high level and low level
(like there is for 32 and 64 bits).
(There are split a string, compare two strings for equality/less/greater
and such.)
So with a little reorganizing not counting the ARM expertise needed
it could be hours rather than days.
There is first light (telescope speach) from the ARM ciforth and
most time went into debugging those basic assembler $/ $@ CORA
that didn't really need to be in assembler. As you know debuggers
are not Forth friendly especially not for threaded code.

Words like UM/MOD are really tedious, but there is no way around that.
The UM/MOD I build into DEC Alpha ciforth came from Linux Torvalds
version for Unix/c.

>
>> So Kolibri is a laudable experiment, I wish them luck.
>> The goal of experiments is to learn something, not to change the
>> world.
>
>What a pity. Actually I was hoping for a change, not just for experimenting.

Small changes eventually lead to large changes.
(Third law of dialectic materialism).

Groetjes Albert

>--
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36254

I invite people to investigate bringing Forth to Kolibri
and then to share what they have found here.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36255

In article <1335fa4a-88b4-4bf7-a966-e00df518068f@googlegroups.com>,
Jason Damisch  <jasondamisch@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I invite people to investigate bringing Forth to Kolibri
>and then to share what they have found here.

Not me. Look at Function 70 read file.

- The second parameter is a pointer to a structure
  that you must build. It includes a pointer to
  yet another thing to allocate, a zero ended string
- no file descriptor, each time you must tell
   the file name via a struct.
- "case-sensitive names"  direct reference to
Russian in filenames.
- lots of reference to stone age things like IDE0 and
  floppy drives.

What a brilliant invention the Unix readfile looks
in comparison!

Groetjes Albert

>
-- 
Albert van der Horst, UTRECHT,THE NETHERLANDS
Economic growth -- being exponential -- ultimately falters.
albert@spe&ar&c.xs4all.nl &=n http://home.hccnet.nl/a.w.m.van.der.horst

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36347 — Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, butforthos has no chrome web browser

the_gavino_himself wrote:
> if forth could just run a browser
> let me save files and possibly get usb3 running to save file to external drive
> run network
> that would be awesome enuf to switch
>
> esp if forth was 1000 times lighter weight
>
> my xterm shows 72788k   is that insane?  gates once said 640k ram is enough
>
> chuck moore said huge ram of modern computers makes os like linux un needed

Responses change but the song remains ever the same.

2008  I booted into forthos and was like, what now?
2010  ever be a free desktop forth os with web browser?
2011  How far is forthOS from having a gui like icewm on archlinux?
           and a browser like firefox?
2012  how far is forth really from a web browser like firefox ?
2013  gui forthos for pc soon?
2015  I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,
           butforthos has no chrome web browser

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36348 — Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc, butforthos has no chrome web browser

On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 1:54:25 AM UTC-5, HAA wrote:
> the_gavino_himself wrote:
> > if forth could just run a browser
> > let me save files and possibly get usb3 running to save file to external drive
> > run network
> > that would be awesome enuf to switch
> >
> > esp if forth was 1000 times lighter weight
> >
> > my xterm shows 72788k   is that insane?  gates once said 640k ram is enough
> >
> > chuck moore said huge ram of modern computers makes os like linux un needed
> 
> Responses change but the song remains ever the same.
> 
> 2008  I booted into forthos and was like, what now?
> 2010  ever be a free desktop forth os with web browser?
> 2011  How far is forthOS from having a gui like icewm on archlinux?
>            and a browser like firefox?
> 2012  how far is forth really from a web browser like firefox ?
> 2013  gui forthos for pc soon?
> 2015  I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,
>            butforthos has no chrome web browser

still no firefox on forth, so yes the quest is un fulfillled!

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#36382 — Re: I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,butforthos has no chrome web browser

the_gavino_himself wrote:
> On Saturday, February 7, 2015 at 1:54:25 AM UTC-5, HAA wrote:
> >
> > Responses change but the song remains ever the same.
> >
> > 2008  I booted into forthos and was like, what now?
> > 2010  ever be a free desktop forth os with web browser?
> > 2011  How far is forthOS from having a gui like icewm on archlinux?
> >            and a browser like firefox?
> > 2012  how far is forth really from a web browser like firefox ?
> > 2013  gui forthos for pc soon?
> > 2015  I would love to switch from freebsd to forth running my pc,
> >            butforthos has no chrome web browser
>
> still no firefox on forth, so yes the quest is un fulfillled!

In the seven years you've been asking has anyone offered to write one?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 3 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.lang.forth

csiph-web