new ixemul V62.1 for 68k.

[bernd_afa]

But there is no any reason to use ixemul for non-GG software. There is libnix for that. And clib2. Why would you use Unix paths on an Amiga Internet browser?

there is also no reason to use ixemul not.if there is really a problem with unix and amiga OS paths, then tell a example.

its also possible to add a function that ixemul should use amiga paths, if there is really a problem.

a program that really fail with the unix paths can maybe call the function ForceAmigaPaths.Then there is set a flag in userdate structure that all open commands of this task and subtasks use no unix path translation.

But currently i have this not add, because we see no program that make problems.

having unix paths is also a enhancement for AOS and fit good in AOS.

instead Progdir: you can just write ./

>In MorphOS we are using libnix for quick ports. Sure, lbinix for 68k is outdated but then >MorphOS developers extended and developed libnix more to get it more compatible and up >to date.

I dont know how much MOS libnix is update, is there somewhere a explain of funcs ?.Is there full C99 support ?.
Can with this ffmpeg and ffplay compile with comfigure and make ?
clib2 as far not good enough to compile a GCC or ffmpeg/ffplay without changes.also clib2 have the mess that all libs you link must written for clib2.so there need 2 sets of libs.so i think clib2 should not use.

I think ixemul have far the best Linux/Unix comapibility and when use Linux code, its best to use the best.

nobody use a Linux from 1999 and port Programs to it.All update their linux so programs can port easy.and thats reason wy i update ixemul.

>Most if not all binaries in gg:bin are ixemul including gcc2, gcc3 and gcc4. That is plenty >of software. I also ported Ruby to GeekGadgets. And when you look at Ruby you see why >ixemul and GG is usually used together: directory layout of Ruby fits perfectly to >GeekGadgets.

With ixemul you can do lots more and it work perfectly mix AOS and Linux.
If the MOS devs dont like that, and their lib is only test with GCC geek gadget and ruby and not with the ixemul programs that are out, then this lib should be better named as mini_ixemul for MOS and OS4.

but now its too late, i have spend some work to fix Problems in MOS source and add missing features that it cost lots more work to begin with V48.

But the good news is, it seem all programs (except abuse) work as before.

[itix]

there is also no reason to use ixemul not.if there is really a problem with unix and amiga OS paths, then tell a example.

For example if you have path "/foobar" will it work right?

having unix paths is also a enhancement for AOS and fit good in AOS.

Sure, why not make it default in AfAOS.

instead Progdir: you can just write ./

But what if I want to access a file named "." or even ".." ? And I want to use PROGDIR:. This is Amiga, not some Unix clone written by some Torvalds.

I dont know how much MOS libnix is update, is there somewhere a explain of funcs ?.Is there full C99 support ?.

I dont know what C99 exactly needs from it but new headers like inttypes.h were added.

Can with this ffmpeg and ffplay compile with comfigure and make ?

Dunno. I never tried. But then, ffmpeg is shitty Unix software.

I think ixemul have far the best Linux/Unix comapibility and when use Linux code, its best to use the best.

If you want Linux compatibility I can recommend installing Ubuntu or Kubuntu. AFAIK they have better Linux compatibility.

If the MOS devs dont like that, and their lib is only test with GCC geek gadget and ruby and not with the ixemul programs that are out, then this lib should be better named as mini_ixemul for MOS and OS4.

Nah, MorphOS build is full ixemul build. It supports all ixemul features. It is just that MorphOS developers are not trying to bring Unix to Amiga. If you want Unix, get OS4.

[bernd_afa]

>For example if you have path "/foobar" will it work right?

i make a dir /test in dopus magellan it create only a dir test in current dir.

i open a shell and type dir /test and a error come.

so what should happen on AOS when do this ?

most time GUI amiga programs use a filerequester, and here you get too no problems with amiag path or ixemul.for example amistuff have enhance ffplay to show a amiga filerequester and read Icon tooltypes.all work well with ixemul. so i see no reason wy with ixemul cant use a amiga GUI.

When create a amiga task and want use ixemul funcs in subthrerads only what you need to call is ix_CreateChildData func before any ixemul lib call.

So you can have both of 2 worlds a Amiga OS API and a complete Linux/Unix API.

also on shell. most users use only simply filesyntax that is most time same in AOS and linux.

of course ixemul support also amiga drives.for example progdir:xxxxxxx

work in ixemul and SYS: etc and volume names work in exemul too




>Sure, why not make it default in AfAOS.

the problem is on AFA OS run many amiga software, maybe this can make problems.i cant test all


>But what if I want to access a file named "." or even ".." ? And I want to use PROGDIR:. >This is Amiga, not some Unix clone written by some Torvalds.

thats more a theory.Do you know a program that use . or .. as file ?

>Nah, MorphOS build is full ixemul build. It supports all ixemul features. It is just that >MorphOS developers are not trying to bring Unix to Amiga. If you want Unix, get OS4.

sadly on OS4 ixmemul work too not full.I still have no MOS tester see, that say me that this ixemul programs work well on MOS.

I see no diffrence of OS4 or MOS.there are near 0 written amiga programs now.most come from Linux opensource world.

>If you want Linux compatibility I can recommend installing Ubuntu or Kubuntu. AFAIK they >have better Linux compatibility.

My main reason to stay on amiga is the amiga program amiblitz.here i have written lots code with that(software synthesizer Bars&Pipes wrapper to use plugins etc).I do not like MUI or Reaction, i like Storm Wizard, because it have a nice GUI Editor so i can get fast a GUI without recompile source.

My software synthesizer have 170 GUI elements in diffrent tabs and 1 window.I think its hard to keep an overview about this, when i like change something when this is in MUI or reaction syntax.

but there is also nice Linux Software here.so wy not use it.but i dont spend lots work to port Linux soft, because i dont like MUI or Reaction.Storm Wizard cant furtherdevelop so need go another way.

GTK i think is acceptable, there are nice GUI Editors here so i have hope, that i can soon change all my software to gtk+ and zune and use the GUI Editors.

I realy dislike linux and C, but C and Linux Soft is good, when you need not write lots code because the code you need is here.but if code thats not here, i can do it faster with amiblitz.

for example i write the AFA prefs program in amiblitz.have only 390 lines and there are 84 GUI elements.all in all i spend in AFA prefs 3-4 hours of work incl GUI make and test.

do the layout of the GUI can everybody easy do with storm wizard, so there are no programming skills need.

and this i hope to get soon with gtk to MUI wrapper too.

[Fab]

I dont know how much MOS libnix is update, is there somewhere a explain of funcs ?.Is there full C99 support ?.
Can with this ffmpeg and ffplay compile with comfigure and make ?

Newer C99 functions aren't all there. But i still compiled ffmpeg and ffplay today to compare behaviour against some mplayer bug. There were only two missing c99 math functions (cbrtf() and some round() variant). It's certainly not rocket science to implement them if they're missing, and a much better idea than using the full blown ixemul just because of that.

[ami_stuff]

I compiled FFplay with libnix a long time ago, but it crahed. I have no motivation to spend my time to debug what is wrong, after all this would change nothing for me, except that FFplay would use no ixemul.lib :afro:

For example if you have path "/foobar" will it work right?

This will only work with progs when someone add a code to support paths like this. I added the code to FFplay, so something like this should work.

Dunno. I never tried. But then, ffmpeg is shitty Unix software.

These days we have only "shitty Unix software" on Amiga. Without this software Amiga couldn't even play DiVXs (MooviD also uses this "shit" -> libavcodec.library, the same FroggerNG (FFmpeg/XAnim) and I belive all of the rest PPC video players) :afro:

[Golem!dk]

These days we have only "shitty Unix software" on Amiga.

But still we have at least some people making a little extra effort and doing proper ports and not just recompilations, all that other junk you might as well run on linux.

[ami_stuff]

But still we have at least some people making a little extra effort and doing proper ports and not just recompilations, all that other junk you might as well run on linux.

You are welcome to do it better.

[kolla]

Developers that don't know the difference between /mydir on amiga and un*x - how reassuring - not

You can't say whether /mydir is un*ix or amiga path out of context, as it's valid path in both - the un*x equivalent of amiga /mydir is ../mydir and the amiga equivalent of un*x /mydir is mydir: - isn't it obvious?

I'm happy that I'm as a user no longer have to mess around with this since the amiga systems I use so often that running un*x software is relevant, are emulated ontop of linux anyways. Via scripts, mapping of /proc and /sys inside UAE, named pipes etc I can even control lots of the linux host operations from within UAE if I want/need that.

[bernd_afa]

Newer C99 functions aren't all there. But i still compiled ffmpeg and ffplay today

So then please make it available for download.
I have talk about that in german forum(July 2009), because there was bashing too against ixmeul.But  a well known serious MOS user was so friendly and post some links to MOS ffmpeg versions.newer versions he not find

This are all old and incomplete Versions.

http://www.amirus.org.ru/files.html
http://piru.morphos.net/%7ep/bin/old/
http://jahjah.free.fr/tools/
http://jahjah.free.fr/morphos/

he also start ffmpeg and post a list of supportet formats,

http://www.amiga-news.de/de/news/comments/236915.html

the build from ami_stuff have lots more codecs and ffplay.All builds on OS4 or MOS have no ffplay.

if you dont believe that the 68k ffmpeg have more codecs and is newer, please download the 68k file and test in UAE.
type in shell

ffmpeg -format

intresting is that there is a MOS ixemul ffmpeg Version here, and this is larger in size and it support also more codecs.

its possible to remove easy codecs in ffmpeg/ffplay if this cant compile.and when look on exe size of ffplay in MOS and OS can also see, this is lots smaller as 68k code.

but because PPC code is due to risc larger so a ffmpeg exec on PPC must be 50%-100% larger.

I also look in the ffmpeg files from MOS, to search if it load some external libs but they dont.

ffplay is build from the ffmpeg makefile and is in include in all ffmpeg packages i see.But not on OS4 or MOS.

So this seem that this OS are not able to build it and also there are no actuel Versions.

[bernd_afa]

But still we have at least some people making a little extra effort and doing proper ports and not just recompilations, all that other junk you might as well run on linux.

the problem is, this changed Ports are not keep upto date, because the devs seem have no time.

netsurf MOS, outdate
ffmpeg MOS i find no upto date Version

sure there are some so called System seller Software as OWB mplayer, that seem upto date, but when you look who do that, you see OS Developers do that.normaly OS devs do not port programs if there is less time.normaly they can enhance the OS and other can do the ports.

sure they are excelent programmers, but they cant do all, maybe they do it only now, because they hope that more MOS or OS4 is sell and they get lots money then.Only time tell if OWB or thunderbird is upto date in 5 Years too.

The problem is there are near no programmers that write software for Amiga.
So only new what come is Unix Software.and so a amiga System must be able to make it easy possible to port Unix software, that at least upto date Unix software is on amiga

If not, then there is only few Software here that is outdate.No great reason for many, to invest much money in a Amiga system

[Golem!dk]

So only new what come is Unix Software.and so a amiga System must be able to make it easy possible to port Unix software, that at least upto date Unix software is on amiga

All this will run much better on unix.

No great reason for many, to invest much money in a Amiga system

But what is the point of using an amiga system if all you use is unix software?

[bernd_afa]

All this will run much better on unix.

But what is the point of using an amiga system if all you use is unix software?

this you must ask OS4 or MOS Users.I stay on 68k, because i have lots of AOS software i want run,like to use dopus magellan , amiblitz.this linux soft is develop on Linux and nobody of the devs take care with changes if amiga version work.amiga devs must change then so it still work with newer version.

but netsurf fplay ffmpeg firefox, mplayer OWB, openoffice, blender is a Unix soft, and this also not change if you make support for amiga filenames or add a MUI GUI instead of using a gtk to mui wrapper.

when time is short, then its better than nothing or a old version a straight linux port.later can of course add more features that you miss in unix software.

[Golem!dk]

when time is short, then its better than nothing or a old version a straight linux port.later can of course add more features that you miss in unix software.

Mhh well... running UAE on Linux you could easily run these things in their native environment, saving your precious time for.. whatever else? I prefer ports that are better adapted to the "amiga" environment. Usually have remote or local access to systems much better suited for unix apps than amigaos.

[bernd_afa]

But still we have at least some people making a little extra effort and doing proper ports and not just recompilations, all that other junk you might as well run on linux.

ffplay and netsurf have too lots amiga specific addons, that are not on linux world.

There is no reason to strip down a linux port that it run on a small libnix or newlib to add new amiga Features.

The /foobar i see now what it do and it fail on ixemul, i didnt notice because i need that feature not.Please tell when you have the last time need this feature ?

but its real no problem to tell ixemul that it not should translate paths to linux paths depend on task.i need just add a function in libc.a that set a flag in userdata so the open commands know to not translate to unix Paths.then all is same as with libnix in file behavior, when a program call this func on start.

I add that feature in coming V63 versions, i guess it need around 5-10 source lines, so if somebody need it, he can use it.
the library number must of course increase so user get inform when lib is too old...

[bernd_afa]

Mhh well... running UAE on Linux you could easily run these things in their native environment, saving your precious time for.. whatever else? I prefer

but you know, Linux users use diffrent desktops like kde gnome and some other.I like dopus magellan 2.thats not here on linux.
Linix apps fit good on amiga OS system even if they only port, because you can use all dev tools and system tools AOS have.

for example if a program do not work, you can look on AOS with snoopdos.linux have too such things
But because Linux is a so much blow up system, you get 1000 ends of fileaccess, and system react lots slower as an amiga System on UAE.

Also linux system is much complicate to understand, the feature when click in a window that it pop to front i dont like.

so there are still lots reason, wy should use a program in amiga OS enviroment than in Linux enviroment.

>I prefer ports that are better adapted to the "amiga" environment

I too but i see no reason wy for this the Linux program must strip down to work with libnix or newlib, when there is a full Linux API(ixemul V62) that need no strip down.

[kolla]

Why would I want ffmpeg on any of my 68k systems?
Why all this talk about MorphOS and OS4 when this thread is about 68k ixemul?