Slashdot Mirror


Petition To Get OS/2 Open Source

Landreth writes "There is currently an ongoing petition taking place at OS2 World to get IBM to open source either the whole part or parts of OS/2 to the community. I would highly encourage the Linux community to take part of this open source petition as well due to the fact there are lots of interesting code base the they could benefit from. To sign the petition: http://www.os2world.com/petition/" Despite the jokes about it, there was some good stuff in OS/2; however, I'd rank the ability to open it up fairly low, since I suspect there's a fair amount of legal restrictions on elements of the code.

11 of 503 comments (clear)

  1. The instant the source is released by mferrier · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ... you know IBM is going to have ten more lawsuits on their hands as various software copyright holders magically find bits of "their code" in the OS/2 source.

  2. OS/2 Ahh the memories by big-giant-head · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I used in the early ninties, for it's day it was very nice. I think a Opensourced OS/2 would be a good alternative to Linux/BSD, for some folks who want a more gui driven system.... It never hurts to have options.

    --

    So Long and Thanks for all the Fish.
  3. MS-Win Integration Code Off-Limits? by EricTheGreen · · Score: 4, Insightful

    IIRC, OS/2 (at least Warp) shipped with a complete install of MS-Win to provide dual-OS support. The OS/2 code contained lots of integration points--if these integration points relied on Win code provided as part of the infamous "divorce decree", that would presumably be off-limits without MS's blessing. If so, would there be enough "untainted" OS/2 code left to be useful as open source?

    I didn't use later versions of OS/2, so I don't know if this chimera-like architecture was changed further on...

  4. I always liked OS/2 by MythoBeast · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I honestly think that OS/2 would have made a much greater impact if it hadn't had such pathetic PR support. The OS itself was a surprsingly strong and reliable system, but their ad campaigns were mind-bogglingly pathetic.

    I'm not sure what the Linux community could gain by it being open source, except maybe some more efficient/reliable algorythms. As such, it would be enough for the IBM written chunks to be open sourced - they don't need a complete, functional code base.

    --
    Wake up - the future is arriving faster than you think.
  5. Not going to happen for a long, LONG time... by Zab+UvWxy · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Why, you may ask?

    There are still a number of financial institutions around the world that run on various versions of OS/2, both at the server and workstation level.

    Also, as of about 5 years ago, CLI OS/2 powered approximately 85% of North America's Automated Teller Machines (ATMs), with a significant share worldwide as well.

    I'm sure most of the companies still behind OS/2 are screaming at IBM not to release so much as a comment from the code.

    --
    "I don't get it." -- ObviousGuy
    1. Re:Not going to happen for a long, LONG time... by sremick · · Score: 5, Insightful

      ATMs are being replaced rapidly with newer models running Windows code. A lot of the color-screen units being installed now run Windows

      Yep, those would be all the ones with the BSODs.

      And I'm not just being a random MS-basher here. The number of ATMs, flight-info displays, and price-check terminals with BSODs these days is staggering. For all you MS-apologists out there: when was the last time you saw an ATM with an error that wasn't an Window error?

  6. Not this again! by LordNimon · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What a joke. Some people have been trying to get OS/2 open-sourced for years. Of course, none of these people is a large IBM customer. Instead, they've always just been a bunch of disgruntled end-users. Looking at this petition, I see that nothing has changed. This petition is no different than any of the dozens before it over the past 10 years.

    There is no way this is going to happen. IBM would have nothing to gain, because they'd have to hire a whole of people to go through the code, figure out what's not protected by any IP (and OS/2 has a 20-year history, so that's a lot of possibile IP), and then release it in such a way as to make sure no one notices, since the last thing IBM wants these days is to bring attention to OS/2.

    --
    And the men who hold high places must be the ones who start
    To mold a new reality... closer to the heart
  7. Re:Workplace Shell by markhb · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I agree; SOM (the System Object Model) and the WPS are really the only pieces that would hold any interest. The OS/2 kernel was an advancement over DOS, but IBM never took it further than that (and it was still designed as a single-user PC OS, albeit with hooks for external security apps).

    That having been said, I think that regardless of the legal entanglements, open-sourcing any part of their fat client OS would be in direct opposition to their "eCommerce Platform" strategy (i.e., run everything as thin clients off of Websphere), and so I agree with Hemos' prediction that this is not going to be more than a "wouldn't it be nice" for the foreseeable future.

    --
    Save Maine's economy: write stuff down. All comments are exclusively my own, not my employer.
  8. Re:I'm In (293) - Many More Needed. by pavon · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Further, history shows that IBM is likely to use a GNU compatible license if they open the source at all.

    Sort of. When they release code added to an existing project, it is released under that projects licence. But most of the code that they have released on their own is under the Common Public License (previously IBM Public License). The CPL is a very nice license, simular to the LGPL in what rights it gives to the user, and the FSF has no philosophical objections with it. However it is not compatable with the GPL for technical legal reasons. That means that you cannot compile GPL(or LGPL) code and CPL code together, although you can link CPL code against LGPL.

    I also agree that it would be very difficult to open source OS/2 because of cross licensing. Just one example - OS/2 is posix compliant. I would be very suprised if IBM did not have some license agreement with the holders of the SVR4 when making the posix layer. Also because they were not planning on releasing the code, they may not have kept track of every location of licensed code. This could become a bigger nightmare then the SCO lawsuit if they tried to open it up.

  9. Re:MSFT will say no by DrXym · · Score: 4, Insightful
    With that said, anything from red books to technical documentation would be useful. Even header files. Or the CSet++ / VisualAge classes. Aside from SOM / WPS, OS/2 is like a primitive NT (flame proof clothes on but it's true) - it has limited plug and play, limited registry, limited games support (DIVE), less APIs, it's not a moving target and its API very closely resembles Win16 / Win32.

    Someone could produce something akin to WINE but for OS2/ apps. What use would this be? I have no idea, but I suppose there might be a lot of file servers, EPOS & banking code out there written to OS/2. It might be a big win to someone if that could be moved over to Linux.

  10. Re:MSFT will say no by John+Hasler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    > That and Microsoft did whatever they could,
    > legal or otherwise, to kill OS/2

    So did IBM.

    --
    Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.