Is your O.S really a O.S? Or is it just a distribution.
#1
Posted 05 November 2012 - 07:39 PM
I feel that most os getting created on these forums still orientate around the console and just add programs. I feel the computercraft normal console is like the Linux kernel.
I feel we need to write up what something must include to be a qualified OS. So let's discuss this.
I feel this sort of classification would help newbie coders alot.
anything I class as a os on this forum I feel needs to have a locked console. AKA, a program as the console. Not the default one. Even it's just a pass through program.
A os must have:
A Custom Console ( do you disagree?)
#2
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:17 PM
a real OS sould have a new UI and/or a ton of epic programs and apis
and definitely some shell tweaks for those without a new UI
#3
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:21 PM
PixelToast, on 05 November 2012 - 08:17 PM, said:
a real OS sould have a new UI and/or a ton of epic programs and apis
and definitely some shell tweaks for those without a new UI
#4
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:36 PM
Cruor, on 05 November 2012 - 08:21 PM, said:
if alterations were made to the was shell and bios work by dan or cloudy to make the start up file be loaded from the bios not shell would allow a programmer to work wit a truly clean slate and build a new shell / UI over the bios. my main reason for that would be that when your program crashes there would be no shell running that a hacker could use.
#5
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:38 PM
#6
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:39 PM
#7
Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:08 PM
#8
Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:56 AM
Also too many crappy program collections pretending to be an OS.
#9
Posted 06 November 2012 - 05:36 AM
#10
Posted 06 November 2012 - 05:47 AM
#12
Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:03 AM
#13
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:07 AM
#14
Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:17 PM
PixelToast, on 05 November 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:
Security. I can't STAND the boot from disk, it opens up a major unstoppable security flaw. If BIOS could be edited per computer, I would have it make the player enter a password to boot from disk. That way, if you wrote your own startup file, and it crashed, you could still recover with a disk, but hackers couldn't get past your login system.
EDIT: Post #50! I'm a kiddie now! YAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111ONE
#15
Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:22 PM
dlcruz129, on 06 November 2012 - 02:17 PM, said:
PixelToast, on 05 November 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:
Security. I can't STAND the boot from disk, it opens up a major unstoppable security flaw. If BIOS could be edited per computer, I would have it make the player enter a password to boot from disk. That way, if you wrote your own startup file, and it crashed, you could still recover with a disk, but hackers couldn't get past your login system.
#16
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:02 PM
#17
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:04 PM
#18
Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:57 PM
Consider first, that, an operating system provides a platform for the user to conduct tasks, run processes, and all the while, doing base tasks such as memory allocation, disk management, etcetera. The reason CC itself has, and is at heart, an operating system, is that the BIOS itself provides the kernel, and the shell just provides a form of "user interface", much like bash in NIX systems and DOS (or, hesitantly, CMD) in Windows.
This creates a form of distinction between the two; those that are "replacement shells" and "operating systems".
If the OS actually has a form of BIOS or kernel that re-implements, or implements, a level of global functionality (either via wrappers, some clever metatable work, etc) to either the standard shell, or even a custom one, then you can class it as an operating system.
On the other side of the line, if it's just a shell that does something different to the normal one, personally, I wouldn't call it an OS. It's not changing the base behaviour of ComputerCraft, doesn't alter the way objects and the system itself works and just doesn't qualify to the point where it "provides a kernel".
It's a blurry distinction, but a distinction nonetheless. And as far as "replacing the BIOS" goes, it's not actually essential: some clever metatable work, or wrappers, work just as fine.
#19
Posted 07 November 2012 - 07:53 PM
#20
Posted 07 November 2012 - 09:50 PM
PixelToast, on 05 November 2012 - 08:38 PM, said:
Without doing so you're just making a new shell, not an OS as you are still running on top of CraftOS. In order for it to be an OS or a redistribution of CraftOS you're going to have to recreate or modify bios.lua.
An OS is the layer between the hardware and the user. In most cases of "OS's" in CC they are an additional layer on top of the OS, thus a shell.
From Wikipedia, I think it is described very well on there:
An operating system (OS) is a collection of software that manages computer hardware resources and provides common services for computer programs.
An operating system shell is a software component that presents a user interface to various operating system functions and services. Thus, it is nearly synonymous with "operating system user interface".[1] The shell is so called because it is an outer layer of interface between the user and the innards of the operating system (the kernel).[2]
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users