Slashdot Mirror
AtheOS Fork Brings BeOS on Top of Linux
Eugenia writes: "Yup, Bill Hayden has forked AtheOS by using its app_server and Interface Kit (along with some other of its kits, like the filesystem layer) and ported it on top of the 2.4.x Linux kernel, without the need for X11. He already has the graphical environment working, and he also has some BeOS apps recompiled and working under Linux. Why BeOS applications? Because that was the reason of the fork. Exactly because AtheOS and BeOS have similar technical principles (highly multithreaded, truly preemptive, similar C++ API etc), by modifying AtheOS's API to match BeOS, Bill is trying to resurrect the BeOS. By doing so this way, Bill is already way ahead from the other two efforts to ressurect BeOS, OpenBeOS (dependant on the 'clean' NewOS kernel) and BlueOS (which depends on Linux and X11)."
Just the thought of being rid of X and into the uber sweet arena of Be's font handling would be swell.
But what about somesort of compatibility for existing X apps? There's way to many great apps out there to just junk....
Or do we have to run X for that?
$sig=$1 if($brain =~
Kurt Skauren(sp?), progenitor of AtheOS, cannot be too pleased about this. I remember the first mailing list discussion where this had been announced and he replied with a sad smiley.
The AtheOS kernel has always been Kurt's baby; his goal of developing an OS targetted solely to desktop applications where the kernel remains under tight control is severely compromised with this split.
I like AtheOS and have even contributed a couple drivers to it, and it just kinda saddens me to think of Kurt's reaction.
Karma: Excellent Birds (mostly as a result of listening to Laurie Anderson)
Forks happen. One of the goals of the GPL is to ensure that sofware doesn't stay under the control of the original author. If you want to write GPL'ed software, you need a thick skin.
That depends on how you define 'way ahead.'
People like me who really like BeOS admire the entire structure of the operating system, from top to bottom. I have zero interest in running FrankensteinBeOS, which is what this sounds like. Therefore I am content to work on the OpenBeOS project, which may be 'way behind', but should have a nicer outcome (for people who like BeOS). The project is coming together quite nicely for something so young.
(It's easier to see really far when you can stand on the shoulders of great engineers.)
"And like that
I mean for a desktop OS, you dont really NEED X.
Sure its nice if you could have it, but what you need is a nice looking gui, you dont need the x protcols esoteric features that only geeks and servers need.
Direct Frame Buffer is good, and there may be other ideas, but really, I hope linux gets rid of X, or at least the desktop linux's such as mandrake, lycoris, lindows and all of them get together and help fund directfb or berlin project or something
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Originally found on:
8 21 5112&list=2311
http://www.geocrawler.com/mail/msg.php3?msg_id=
FROM: Bill Hayden
DATE: 03/26/2002 06:59:50
SUBJECT: [Atheos-developer] Atheos Fork Announcement
Well, it was not my intent to announce this quite this soon, but given
the recent conversation on the list, I feel that it's best not to wait
any longer.
I forked Atheos about 6 months ago and have been continuously developing
it since that time. I've taken it in some very new directions. I
should warn you that some of you will absolutely love the changes, and
some of you will perhaps feel that the "dream" of Atheos has been sold out.
The new project has had a name since the beginning, but I'm going to
hold off on releasing that until I can verify that the domain names and
trademark are secure. So I'll call it "New Atheos" for the purposes of
this e-mail.
New Atheos has the following major new features:
o Runs on top of the Linux kernel, not the Atheos kernel
o Atheos API has been merged with the BeOS API
o PowerPC support
o gcc 3.0.X compatiblity
o OpenTracker/Deskbar desktop manager
These features give the following benefits:
o Most BeOS programs compile and run with little or no changes
o Linux kernel means that CD-ROM, CD booting and installing, DHCP, etc.
work
o Linux kernel means that driver support is excellent
o Mac users get a piece of the action
Things I haven't even started on:
o Printing
o Media Kit
o Replicants
Existing Atheos programs will need changes to compile. I haven't found
one that took me longer than a few minutes to "convert". Where Atheos
and BeOS use different semantics, I chose the BeOS method.
I am going to hold off on a release until I can successfully compile and
run OpenTracker and Deskbar. They use just about every obsolete and
goofy BeOS construct that exists. I'm most of the way there, though,
especially for Deskbar. Kurt wasn't lying when he said it would be a
nightmare to port them. Of course, I'm doing an "anti-port". When some
BeOS program won't compile, I change the API to match it instead of
changing the program itself.
The first BeOS program that successfully came up was Pulse, and there
was no small amoung of satisfaction to see good ole' Pulse running on my
new system. Nostalgic BeOS users can perhaps understand.
I'm writing in a hurry, so hopefully I haven't forgotten something
important. And no, I can't give a release date yet. I hope to have a
CVS server up at the time of release.
Thanks,
Bill Hayden
Wasn't one of the touted features of BeOS its low latency, single-user kernel optimized for multimedia stuff? Demos had multiple video players all playing smoothly, while 3-D animations occured in other windows.
How well can the Linux kernel deliver such performance?
There's 10 types of people in this world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
that's GnuBe/Linux to you sir....
A long time ago, I wrote an article called "The Rise and Fall of OS Empires". It concluded on how with free software, the software lives on beyond its environment. Underlying the article, though very subtle, was an argument against the BeOS operating system. I've always been critical of any proprietary operating system since the control of the software always rests with the developer.
Now first, a minor argument before I continue on. Names are like symbols in that they stand for something. So when people think of BeOS they think of a great many things, mostly good. But with software, these kinds of symbols aren't very useful and often serve to confuse things. To say that BeOS has come back from the dead is a definite misconception.
Any software is a mix of algorithms and technologies--each which are more general than the code itself. So to reintroduce these things in another piece of software can be said to in a sense recreate that software.
This new AtheOS, from my perspective, is welcome. Hopefully this software will provide interesting technologies which can be implemented in other software.
Hopefully BeOS users and developers are more aware of the risks present in proprietary software. I'd hate to see the same mistake being made a again.
Kudos.
> Forget about linux on the desktop, my votes going to BeOS.
This _IS_ Linux "for the desktop".
Linux == kernal
BeOS == dead
this == OpenSource port of BeOS API's on Linux kernal, imo Linux for the desktop.
At this rate the BeOS APIs could become the POSIX for advanced "extras" like GUI, node watching etc, which would be great! IF properly maintained.
mlk
Wow, I should not post when knackered.
If you just want an X replacement that supports Gtk and Qt, check out DirectFB.
X can do all of the things you mentioned via extensions like Xrender. Software needs to be written to use these extensions, but it's certainly easier to do that than to rewrite everything for a completely new windowing system. Like it or not (I personally like it) we're stuck with X for the foreseeable future.
I'd rather have FrankensteinBeOS than deadBeOS R5 that can't run on my new hardware. Perhaps you should help him rather than just bitch about it being a patchwork of different projects
A "Like OSNews except slower on the uptake" department?
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
That depends on how you define 'way ahead.'
People like me who really like BeOS admire the entire structure of the operating system, from top to bottom. I have zero interest in running FrankensteinBeOS, which is what this sounds like. Therefore I am content to work on the OpenBeOS project, which may be 'way behind', but should have a nicer outcome (for people who like BeOS). The project is coming together quite nicely for something so young.
Yes, but there's something to be said for taking the middle road, too. It may be true BeOS was a radical departure as opposed to Linux's adherence to legacy POSIX. But I suspect this new fusion may have more success as a desktop OS than either Linux or BeOS had alone. While not as radical a departure as Be, it is still a very significant departure for Unix/Linux. As nice as Be was, commercialy it went over like a lead balloon. Perhaps a more incremental approach to innovation will have more success.
This is the beauty of open source - you can mix and match as you please, and the cream rises to the top. And now that one of the nicest desktops has migrated over to one of the most advanced (and popular) kernels, I expect to see some interesting developments going forward.
My neighborhood is having a block sale this weekend. In my garage there is 10 pentium PC's with memory ranging from 24-64 megs and the processors from 60mhz to 233mhz. I was going to just toss them in a landfill to make some space.
I thought of trying to sell them, but windows is way overbloated to run effectively on any of these beasts. I happened across a BE cd that I bought last year and thought I would try it. To my amazement these machines run REALLY nice!
I haven't tried AtheO/S yet, but I plan to give it a spin tonight.
i think getting rid of x is a good an logical step. There is no reason for a normal desktop user to have all the features that X provides.
it would result in a serious performance infrease. i think Apple got it right when they implemented OSX without the X windows part. Linux shoudl follow that model.
The war with islam is a war on the beast
The war on terror is a war for peace
I do believe that as late as version 5.1, Novell was using DR.DOS as the boot OS to bootstrap yourself into the Novell server OS. I don't know how Novell 6 is going to handle this, but Dr.DOS is far from "irrelevant" and is infact still a useful tool.
This isnt GNU Linux, this is Beos Linux, its therefore not the same OS anymore, because the official Linux OS ia vastly diffrent and they arent compatible.
This is like saying GNU HURD is the same as GNU Linux.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Out in the general populace, "programmer network admin things" might be something no-one cares about.
But this is the Linux community. Honestly, how much of the Linux user community doesn't fit the "programmer/network admin" description? 1-2%, maybe?
Every single Linux user at my school is a heavy user of X's network transparency features, and I doubt my school is all that abnormal.
Getting rid of X, no. Fork of the whole system (X version, noX version), maybe. Redesign of X to include both directfb and network transparency? great idea!
And, of course, Berlin, which happens to rock hard.
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
I appreciate what this guy is doing, but seriously folks, why the hell is everybody so intent on making some sort of BE/Linux hybrid? I support OpenBeos for the following very good reasons:
1) Has over 100 developers now
2) Intent on rewriting original Be api so that compile and eventual binary compatibility is attained
3) Uses an alternate liscense to GPL so that open source is maintained without frightening away commercial developers due to fear of *GPL Contamination*
4) Already has contacts with commercial developers and distributors (albeit kept well under wrap right now)
5) Misc. Beos fans don't want to touch Gnome/KDE with a ten foot pole, and I know it would be way too tempting to port them for application compatibility purposes. Beos booted on my PII400 in 15 seconds, and was fast as hell. Would a BE/Linux combo keep Beos' vastly ease of use and configuration, or would it inherit Linux's most dreaded characteristics?
I'm rambling like a rabbit with the flu. But these are some valid concerns. Check out OpenBeos right now and sign up if you have the time and skills.
Wha??? EVERYONE cares about network transparency these days! (even if they don't realise that they do)
;-)
I hardly know any windows users nowadays that don't access their email through a web interface, so they can access it from any computer they happen to be on. Outlook Exchange is the next thing up, which true - is still a corporate thing at the moment.
But think - how long will it be before your wordprocessor is running on a remote machine and you just have a dumb terminal? What would be the advantage of this? Well it doesn't take much hardware to run a dumb terminal, compared to having to carry around a hard disk, cdrom, lots of memory, etc. etc. etc
And the extension to this is distributed computing - I mean true distributed computing, where your wordprocessor uses other peoples run time if it needs it, and theirs does likewise. Eventually you end up with the idea of one _massive_ computer, distributed around the world so that it never goes down in one go, which everyone connects to using dumb terminals.
Network transparency is the future, for these and for numerous other reasons (control your fridge from your computer! Yay!)
In the same way that "Only a geek sends text messages & emailswas 5/10 years ago, the same is happening now with network transparent computing.
We can't help it if we are ahead of fashion
Comment removed based on user account deletion
A machine of that class serves as my mp3 jukebox/cablemodem firewall (I know...I know...but all of this stuff is in my living room and two pcs next to the desk is quite geeky enough......so I'll just have to do without a proper DMZ). For that matter, the guts from some of them could be reworked into a nice audio component for your stereo system. One could transparently handle mp3, ogg, various tracker modules, midi whatever. A cheap video card with TV out and and IR transciever would even give proper stereo component control over the device...with visualization going to the TV even.
Configure them properly and give em away if you have to. Mine had a home once I accumulated enough spare parts to put it together. The point is these machines aren't trash by any means. Oh well, I'm glad you found a use for them after all.
What the hell are you talking about? BeOS doesn't have any clustering abilities.
FinalScratch runs on Linux now, since BeOS is pretty much dead. At least that's what I heard.
;)
You can simulate a cheap Finalscratch by using AlsaPlayer and feeding the speed parameter via an external program, using libalsaplayer. Some folks are already doing this in a lab. There's this rumour that FinalScratch is using some bits of AlsaPlayer (plugins), have to check if this is really true
-adnans
"In short: just say NO TO DRUGS, and maybe you won't end up like the Hurd people." --Linus Torvalds
DRI? Ok use DIR to render the GUI.
Oh right, its not fast enough, you cant.
Face it, DRI, and all of these exentions cannot save X, its almost as bad as Netscape was in its final days, you can only extend a broken program so much before its so complicated that its utterly useless.
The X extentions are so damn complicated that no ones using them, KDE isnt using Xrender, Gnome isnt using Xrender, hell even Enlightenment isnt using Xrender, the only people who seem to be able to make Xrender work, are the programmers working on it.
NO where else have I seen alpha channeling in linux than from keith packard the creator of the Xrender extention.
What good is an overly complicated undocumented hard to use API on top of a bloated badly designed implementation of X?
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Most windows users are just checking their email, surfing the web, playing games and chatting.
You are talking about the corperate world, which i personally dont give a damn about, I'm concered with the DESKTOP for USERS.
When X provides an OSX quality interface, thats when I'll believe all the BS about the extentions and X being saved.
Its almost as silly as gnutella, sure you can extend a broken program, but it only makes that broken program more and more complicated until it gets to the point where no one can use the extentions except the people who wrote them (Xrender)
(Microsofts undocumented API features)
etc
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
Linux cant even do alpha channeling, its on Windows98 level!!!!! How do you expect it to somehow all of the sudden have distributed computing like you claim
I mean sure its possible but i dont see anyone rushing to use linux when it cant compete with OSX.
OSX is the unix desktop of choice, Even I'd be using OSX if i could afford a mac
Why should I use X? OSX is better, Berlin is better, hell WindowsXP is better
X just is stuck in the past, playing catch up via extentions will only make it slower, more bloated, and more complicated
I say its time to scrap X and start over while you still can.
If you use Linux, please help development of Autopac
how long will it be before your wordprocessor is running on a remote machine and you just have a dumb terminal?
;)
-9 years ago actually, and thensome. A computer lab used by the English department in my old high school used a system just like that. There was one server, a whopping 486, and everyone used a word processor remotley (the name escapes me, but it made Word Perfect 5.1 look modern). The terminals were all old cheap 8088's with nice burnt-in monochrome monitors, and it all ran on an Novell network. And it was fast and worked great, except for one time I was at the second node and knocked out the network cable and everyone mysterously froze
When I look at labs now, with all thier fancy P4's at every station, it almost makes me cringe. All that power gone to waste for no more than Word. It's a sin I tell ya!
Gnome, KDE and Enlightenment all use XRender.
Napster-to-go says "Fill and refill your compatible MP3 player", which is a lie. It's not MP3. It's WMA with DRM.
... all those people working on OpenBeOS or AtheOS can comfortably do so within an environment that more closely resembles their ultimate goal.
:).
Sounds cool to me. All those AtheOS and OpenBeOS developers can soon use FrankensteinBeOS as their development platform.
For most aspects of OBOS development, this is not true. FrankensteinBeOS is not binary compatible with BeOS/OpenBeOS, which is pretty useful when I go to compile my BeOS/OpenBeOS project! Just because it LOOKS like BeOS doesn't mean we can use it for development. Those of us working on OBOS usually work in BeOS R5 (until such time as we can work within OBOS of course
Maybe the low-level guys for OBOS would like to use this new variant, though.
"And like that
I don't see how Berlin is really a replacement for X. It does not have any low level drivers, but instead relies on other consoles such as DirectFB, or even X to run. It would probably take at least five years at the pace development is going to even have something useful.
You had me at "dicks fuck assholes".
was that WordStar possibly? Ah for the good old days... fit the OS (DOS 4.01), word processor and spreadsheet (Lotus 1-2-3 of course) all stored on the 5.25" full-height 10MB hard drive with plenty of room to spare for the text games =]
The X extentions are so damn complicated that no ones using them, KDE isnt using Xrender, Gnome isnt using Xrender, hell even Enlightenment isnt using Xrender, the only people who seem to be able to make Xrender work, are the programmers working on it.
This only goes to advertise to the world exactly how little you know about X and how little attention should be paid to your misinformed rants about it.
NO where else have I seen alpha channeling in linux than from keith packard the creator of the Xrender extention.
Open your eyes then. It's everywhere, certainly all over my desktop anyway. If you want to live in the past, feel free. If you want to ignore it, feel free. Spreading misinformed, baseless FUD about one of the most significant modernizations to have happened to X in its entire lifespan isn't appreciated however.
What good is an overly complicated undocumented hard to use API on top of a bloated badly designed implementation of X?
The Render extension is a sensible, well-thought out solution to many of X's previous shortcomings. It's not perfect, but then - it's not finished yet. As for documentation, what do you need exactly? The wire protocol for Render is pretty comprehensively documented, and if you're merely trying to use it in an Xlib program, well, there's always the source code to look at. Yes, that's not perfect, but Render is the work of just Keith, and XFree86 is short-staffed enough as it is. Again - it's not finished yet! In any case, it seems that's enough for Trolltech and the GTK+ developers...
I'm also going to argue here that XFree86 isn't bloated and neither is it badly designed. What it is is massively short of good developers, especially those that are interested in working on the internals of the X server as opposed to just getting the latest and greatest features of their new graphics card working. It's an engineering project as big as the Linux kernel or KDE or GNOME, but with only about 5 people working on the core parts. Is it any wonder it develops more slowly?
Of course, if you were that concerned about X, I'd suggest you go and start hacking code for it, because that's the only way it's going to get better. Except, you're not a graphics programmer are you? Because if you were, you wouldn't have made such baseless allegations about X, and certainly wouldn't have made such basic factual errors as you did in your post.
OK, so remember this: the next time someone asks you about the benefits of OSS, you'll have another great example. Especially as this project is said to work better already than some of the Be emulation projects that mostly wrote everything by hand. Stuff like this couldn't be done in a closed source environment.
Having said that, it may not really sound like news to you, but I believe that this is a very good example of this benefit of OSS.
"We can confirm that Debian does *not* ship the version with the trojan horse. Our version predates it." [CA-2002-28]
BeFS and fast, consistent GUI. I miss BeFS live queries the most. The simple, yet effective API (Simple even though it was all in C++). Rest in piece...
If this BeOS GUI on the Linux kernel turns out to be all it's cracked up to be (at the least a better-looking, easier-to-code-for windowing system) then perhaps it may become more attractive to both GUI app developers and "mainstream" users alike.
I know from talking to friends and family who've tried Linux, part of their reluctance to change is due to the way X behaves and how it works (or doesn't work) with video and applications such as Netscape or RealPlayer.
Another advantage is the ability to port many of the nice-looking/functioning BeOS programs to run in Linux.
Someone mentioned it before, but take MacOSX as an example - they did it right: Use a powerful backend (BSD) and slap a much prettier interface on top. Joe Sixpack doesn't care or need to know what OS is actually running in the background as long as the interface is easy-to-use and clean (enough). As a developer new in the world of OS programming, it seems like Linux is a good choice for open source driver support and overall popularity of the operating system among open source developers.
Give me a good OS or give me WindowsXP! (read: death)
...and that's the way the cookie crumbles.
Personally, as someone who has never used Be, I find this an interesting test.
... 16? 64? more? There are major problems with inter-process scheduling and communication which cause real scaling problems. Perhaps one architecture will be a lot better than another.
Some people have been saying that X Window needed to be replaced, and this will be a replacement. It will be quite interesting to see what difference it makes in performance. Also in compatibility (which X Window seems to be quite good at).
It's always important to occasionally go back to the basics and redo them from a different perspective. That's one reason that the Hurd is important. I suspect that there will turn out to be major differences between how Linux and the Hurd scale to multiprocessor systems, as n increases beyond 4 to
Similarly, as full motion 3-D becomes important there may be major differences between X Window and BeWindows (whatever it's called... I said I wasn't a Be user). Perhaps both will have advantages in slightly differing areas. In that case it will be very nice to have them both sitting on top of the same base layer. With enough RAM (and an additional monitor? [OK, I'm oversimplifying. I want to have shared disk files between the systems.]) you might have one session of each running at the same time. This would slow things down of course, but depending on what the difference in advantages turned out to be it might still be worthwhile. Or not.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
Don't be daft. Win2K is a good deal faster than Win98 in the UI department (and after service pack 2, in the gaming department as well)! Moving from the 16/32 bit mess that is Win98 to the pure 32bit code of WinNT made a big difference.
A deep unwavering belief is a sure sign you're missing something...
However, with this AtheOS fork, there is right now a working OS that runs the Be API. This means that updating Be-native programs is not totally in vain, and it also means that some people might even write new apps for the Be API. This wouldn't happen if the only hope to keep that API alive was the promise of OpenBeOS somewhere down the road. This is not to slight OpenBeOS; it's just a very ambitious project that will not produce well-functioning results for a while. By the time it does, it can count itself lucky when Ahte-Linux-BeOS apps will run on it after only a recompile.