Consequences of the AmigaOS 3.1 source code "leak", one year after?

[kolla]

Such are referred to as leaked documents. Not open source.

But, they are sources, you can compile them and build binaries.

Just because something is IN the Public Domain does not make it Open Source.

In my country, we do not have the concept of "Public Domain", and I very much doubt that the sources we speak of qualifies as Public Domain anyways.

Open source has been voluntarily forwarded and made available to the end user for examination. There was no such voluntary disclosure.

"Open source" has no strict definition, you prefer to look at it as defined by OSI, but they do not own the term, it has been around for much longer. What I have been saying is that when sources are so easily available, they are for all _practical purposes_ open sources - nobody knows who have them, who have seen them, who have used them, and what for, unless they just admit it. Some do so openly, and it has had zero consequences for them so far.

[kolla]

And again: No. Do you call "publishing a program" or "deriving your own work from them" a "practical purpose?". I do. And no, that's exactly what you *cannot* do. The consequences are that your program will be taken down, by a call to order, and exactly that happened to the sides that hosted the stolen source.

Oh, but taking down stuff would be "a massive dick move" and hurt people, you know.

[kolla]

just download the correct drivers from Asus to fix it.

Nope, they did not fix anything, they made the camera not work at all with Windows 10 - not work as in.. no software would find any camera, despite it being there the device list, and according to Windows, working.

[kolla]

I'm not "calling" them illegal, they are. Doesn't bother me, but I'm not into redefining reality until it suits my needs either.

Ah, you do not care about whether something is legal or not, ok.

[kolla]

How can anyone say "Yes" without making it blatantly obvious that they have tried to do so?

Clearly someone managed to compile parts of it at least, the parts that you can find in BB3+4, the parts with major version string ... 42

To build the whole thing is not what people are interested in either, each person has his/her point of "itch" that has been bothering them.

[kolla]

Kolla, I haven't ever looked at the source code of an operating system written in C. C isn't one of my primary coding languages. I can adjust a C program's data, stuff like getting an Arduino system running. That isn't the same as an operating system.

Er... ok?

Both the leaked 3.0 (?) and 4 partially or completely rewritten in C, but certain parts of the leaked source must be derived from the BCPL ancestor, TripOS, that was ported to the Amiga. And really, no one has ever attempted a full translation of AmigaDOS, into hand coded assembler. For any kind of Amiga hardware. At least that I'm aware of.

Bits of the operating system can be coded in assembler, and ideally, an OS evolves tailored to the hardware available.

It's amazing how like AmigaDOS TripOS is. Because TriPOS is still in use, networked distros that cost money, by a lot of British insurance companies.

Here's a very short overview, with regard to similarities like drivers and libraries. Parts of the leak might well date from a much earlier BCPL ancestor. That isn't true of AmigaOS V4 and later. That's all been redone, which is probably partly WHY V4+ is so greedy on 68K machines for resources.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TRIPOS

Anyway, I haven't looked at the code. Lattice is mentioned in a lot of publicly available Commodore works, and I bought a few, so it's reasonable to assume that was the dev tool used to put the leak together in the first place, V3.0 was a CBM software and firmware release. Isn't that right? I don't know.

Unless, perhaps, it isn't genuine in all respects. That's one possibility, with an internet dissemated file.

I don't understand - why are you talking about OS4?
(And why do you write so much that is not at all relevant here?!)

Maybe you do not know the AmigaOS version string conventions? OS 3.0 was largely "version 39", as in most binaries in OS 3.0 had major version 39. In OS 3.1, these were bumped to 40 and maybe a few 41. In the OS 3.1 leaked sources, there are a few things that have developed further, to version 42.

This has _nothing_ to do with OS4.

[kolla]

Well, if you checked the TripOS link, you would have noted that it lists Amiga V4 as being totally written in C

Oh, I know very well about TRIPOS, so I didnt't feel a need to read wikipedia about it - not surprised some Amiga zealot have dumped in some misinformation about OS4 in there, don't know how many time I have removed bogus information about Amiga from wikipedia (such as IBM getting code to Workbench for use in OS/2 in exchange for CBM getting ARexx - you know, completely nutty "stories")

As for the leaked source being 3.1, I didn't know that, I thought it was 3.0.

No, it is 3.1 allright, and quite a lot more too. Not sure if it also contains things that were worked on under Amiga Technologies, such as stuff for the Walker, but I don't think so, I believe it must be a dump from someone's hard drive at Commodore.

[kolla]

Rexx = IBM. Arexx = Amiga implementation of Rexx. Therefore, to certain degree, Bill has a relationship with an IBM product, in that he developed an Amiga implementation of an IBM product. He didn't do it blindfolded.

A friend of mine wrote Regina, the free implementation of REXX, he too, has no relations to IBM. You see, REXX is a _language_, anyone can implement interpreter for it.

[kolla]

The NFS client software which was part of AS225 was used to connect the Amigas of the developers to the NFS servers which would contain the operating system source code and the material archived/maintained by CATS.

Do you have information on how AS225 from CBM became I-Net225 from Interworks? And can you confirm that it should be able to connect to Internet (albeit IPv4) using SANA-II ethernet device even today?

[kolla]

@olsen
Thank you for extensive reply, as usual!

My first ethernet card was the I-Card PCMCIA card, also from Interworks (an slightly different incarnation of http://www.bigbookofamigahardware.com/bboah/product.aspx?id=923). We were a handful of students who bought them in a bulk order from IAM for our A1200s at the univ computer club, where we had direct access to Internet, and everyone using public addresses.

We had one minor problem with those cards on the A1200 - the common reset issue. Then we had one major problem with them, they would sometimes lock up the machine and _flood_ the ethernet with packages, essentially DOSing the LAN and making life miserable for everyone on it. We tried all the TCP stacks that were available in hopes of getting those cards to work more reliable, but in the end, after disassembling and debugging the SANA-II driver itself, there was no question what was at fault.

We contacted both IAM and Interworks about our issues, but it never resulted in any improvements. Our work-around was to break up our LAN into smaller segments, and have one just for the Amiga computers, so any berserk I-Card would just affect the other Amiga systems. Later on came the open driver for the NE2000 PCMCIA cards, and we threw the I-Cards in the bin. Life became much easier

[kolla]

Sure. And if you do that for the WRONG operating system, and release it for sale, IBM will sue your arse off.

No, you are wrong.

Just because Rexx has public versions, doesn't make all of Rexx open source and free to develop for, on any platform.

Rexx is an ANSI standard (X3.274), and Regina is an open source implementation of a Rexx interpreter, since 1992 (and it isn't even the only one):

http://regina-rexx.sourceforge.net

[kolla]

I'll give you a clue. Try it on a mainframe...

... you ain't got one. Ain't that a shame...

You have no idea what my job is and what I have access to.

Yes, Regina is open source. Rexx isn't. If was, It would be somewhat easier to google the source code for it an IBM mainframe.

What - are you googling?

Again - just like with C, Rexx is the language, for which there are multiple implementations, some commercial, some not. IBM have their implementations, but they do not stand in the way of others doing theirs. It is quite common for them all to name the interpreter available in the command path "rexx". IBM has a long history with Rexx, since the language was born at their turf (by the hands of Mike Cowlishaw), and IBM has used it through-out their products, on mainframes as you say, and on OS/2 and elsewhere. They also have worked closely with and contributed to the Rexx Language Association, with funding of development as well as source code of their own development.

http://www-01.ibm.com/software/awdtools/rexx/opensource.html

And what a surprise (not), William S. Hawes took part in the standardisation, his name is in the technical committee...

http://www.rexxla.org/rexxlang/standards/j18pub.pdf

[kolla]

Yeah, sure, and you take the mainframe home with you in your backpocket at the weekend. I don't care whose mainframe it is, I don't care if the it's the NSA backbone machine, it's not yours.

What does that have to do with anything? Do I have an IBM S/390 in my apartment? No. Why would I, I prefer to not bring work with me home.

Yes, and hell will freeze over before they release their mainframe source. Or rather, they will have a highly evolved replacement before they release it as open source. In the meantime, please stop repeating the same assumption, that because there is a "free and open" version, all versions are "free and open".

I notice that things are tipping over for you, gone is the polite tone - maybe because it so hard for you to admit that you are wrong?

Again - Rexx is a _language_, for which there are _many_ implementations, not just the ones - plural- that IBM had for their various mainframes, AIX and OS/2 up through the years. IBM never chased anyone around for doing other Rexx implementations on whatever architectures. IBM released Rexx sources to the RexxLA. These are the sources we discuss here, if at all, not the sources to z/OS or whatever you seem to think. IBM is in general quite active with open source, especially if your field is within HPC/HPN, security and monitoring. They support development of both Linux and *BSD on their hardware, both metal and virtualised, by offering developers hardware. And they also work on bringing features from the mainframe world to Linux and the BSDs.

[kolla]

As pointed out on http://rexxinfo.org:

Rexx is standardized by the 1996 ANSI standard and is not controlled by any one company or individual.

[kolla]

On the topic of Rexx and truthiness...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amiga

IBM licensed the Amiga GUI from Commodore in exchange for the REXX language license. This allowed OS/2 to have the WPS (Work Place Shell) GUI shell for OS/2 2.0 a 32-bit operating system.

With reference to two links, of which one is just a pointer to the other:

https://web.archive.org/web/20121020022353/http://www.os2bbs.com/os2news/OS2Warp.html

a deal was made with Commodore. Commodore licensed IBM's REXX scripting language for inclusion in their AmigaOS, and IBM took many GUI design ideas from the AmigaOS for their new GUI

True? False?

[kolla]

Completely irrelevent to the Amiga. If you want to write Rexx for the Amiga, I have to point out, it's been done.

Yes, several Rexx interpreters have been written for, and ported to Amiga.

If you just want to hold up Rexx as an example of something completely and utterly Open Source

I never did - I just point out that.. sigh... Rexx is a language, today defined by an ANSI standard, for which anyone can write an interpreter, commercially closed source, or open source - it does not matter - and sell, or give away or whatever. And IBM would not care one bit. Would IBM care if someone stole sources for a closed source interpreter they have? Sure. But that was never the issue here.

That doesn't mean Arexx is open source though.

And I never said it is, as I have mentioned so many times now, there are many Rexx interpreters, both commercial closed source and open source ones. ARexx clearly is a property of Willam S. Hawes, and not licensed to Commodore by IBM.