new ixemul V62.1 for 68k.

[Piru]

Qed

[kolla]

i click now again on the link, it work.

What I meant was that the download links don't work.

[itix]

I dont have Internet at home so I am replying late.

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 ?

I think my I start using . and .. as filenames in my future developments for Amiga.

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 dont care about OS4. If there is no full ixemul port -- too bad.

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.

Sure. I have ported n+1 SDL games to MorphOS. Many of them are bad while some games are brilliant.

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.

When it comes to GTK you probably can not port it natively to Amiga Intuition. You must either use custom screen (Cygnix style) or go GTK-MUI kind of route. And GTK-MUI needs more work because GDK-MUI layer is needed in the future. On the other hand GTK-MUI is not that bad because if you do it cleverly you can recycle lot of original GTK source code.

I have to comment this one:

>- total leakage of any AmigaOS allocated resources on exit() or abort()

thats on all AOS libs same, they have no resourcetracking, when a program need that it must use atexit.

Do you know what happens to your atexit() calls at abort() ?

[unusedunused]

Qed

sorry, i dont understand what you mean, i dont believe you anything if you cant post reproducable or readible Facts.

sorry that i say this, but for me your reactions look like as a little child reaction when somebody have a better toy than you.

that you spend so much time to tell some unlogic things and you bring no ceckable facts about 68k ixemul which you never test, is really unlogic.

I at least have A MOS System on my cyberstrom PPC 233 install, and test a little MOS ixemul with 68k soft and notice some problems, so i need it not.I also see that there are enough incomplete outdate Ports.

I dont understand wy you want from me that i rename ixemul.Mos devs say that ixemul should only use for geek gadget compiler and some dev tools.Wy you need a linux shell, or Linux compilers btw ?.Port it clean to amiga OS and you need no ixemul when soem say they dont want use shitty direct Ports

There are lots other ixemul soft out that run well on ixemul V48 and V62.1.
And if you dont want that it run on MOS native ixemul well and fix Bugs, then the MOS devs should rename their ixemul to mini_ixemul or maybe tiny_ixemul.

whne look at storm mesa the MOS side do it right, they do not port a stormmesa which miss man features and name it Mesa.They name it tinygl

also all the incomplete MOS Ports should better name as mini, so users see at first look that it is not a full Port, because the Linux Version support more feature.

Or is that then a real Port when it use libnix, but there are less features here ?


-----

I do updates and fix ixemul if old ixemul Soft that is well written fail on V62 and work on  older V48.2 V48.3
what to do with abuse i am not sure, it crash when i use ixemul V48.3.work only with V48.2.with V48.2 the mousepointer do not move, only when i click somewhere it is draw.also there is no sound play.

I compile abuse from new source with SDL and it work with sound/ opengl and mousepointer , but have a memleak(decrement mem every sec 20 kb).need look wy, if AROS port have same Problem.

But i do my best to make the amiga Software better.......

@Itix
>Do you know what happens to your atexit() calls at abort() ?

the same as happen with libnix atexit.
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/functions/atexit.html
atexit is a standard C method and also on libnix in.
for example SDL add here code to close amiga window and free amiga resources.thats on all systems same.

when a program do abort it do not free resources.most programs use assert this call atexit too.

abort is not good on amiga, because amiga have no resource tracking, but problem is in libnix and ixemul same

[unusedunused]

@Itix
>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.

Progdir work.

but as i told i add a function
ix_AmigaPaths(true)

then the unix path translation is not done.

Or do you reall think thats not possible ?

[itix]

but as i told i add a function
ix_AmigaPaths(true)

then the unix path translation is not done.

Or do you reall think thats not possible ?

I have found better method: I am using -noixemul switch.

Btw how is auto-open libraries working with ixemul?

There are lots other ixemul soft out that run well on ixemul V48 and V62.1.
And if you dont want that it run on MOS native ixemul well and fix Bugs, then the MOS devs should rename their ixemul to mini_ixemul or maybe tiny_ixemul.

whne look at storm mesa the MOS side do it right, they do not port a stormmesa which miss man features and name it Mesa.They name it tinygl

There is one difference. Tinygl is not based on mesa. MorphOS ixemul was ported from 68k ixemul and is compatible with the original 68k ixemul software but makes it possible use ixemul from PPC native software. So it is the same but extended for MorphOS.

Then there is someone who figures out that MorphOS ixemul has higher version number and it is somehow important to have this ixemul on 68k Amiga because it has higher version number. There was nothing wrong with the original 68k ixemul but ixemul had to be ported and now Amiga users had ixemul V49 for 68k Amiga. It didnt work but they had ixemul with higher version number which matches with MorphOS.

Okay, there are bug fixes in MorphOS ixemul, some maybe even important, but only reason why 68k ixemul went out of hand was a version number.

[unusedunused]

I have found better method: I am using -noixemul switch.

Btw how is auto-open libraries working with ixemul?

I and i think many other dont know how auto open in libnix work.Most do the logical Amiga OS way, that is explain in RKM.Its really not much work to open a lib.there can also do a code snippet that open often needed aos libs.you need only paste it

but its really lots more easy to use way from RKM then port a big Linux program to work with a small libnix.

struct Library *AslBase:

AslBase = OpenLibrary("asl.library");

and at end of source or in a atexit func you need do

CloseLibrary(AslBase);

>Okay, there are bug fixes in MorphOS ixemul, some maybe even important, but only >reason why 68k ixemul went out of hand was a version number.

You still have not written if the programs i post work on your MOS.Your excuse is only that this programs should not use with ixemul.

what do you say when a program use opengl functions that MOS tinygl not have.
Do you think this program should port so it work with the fewer functions of tinygl or its a shitty program ?

>I have found better method: I am using -noixemul switch.

everybody can do what he want.

enhance libnix is too possible but wy need not 2 big unix API(ixemul and libnix) i think.You yourself tell you want not use this shitty Un++ix Ports, but then i dont understand, wy MOS devs have add more functione to libnix to make porting more easy.

more functions help more easy port programs.MOS devs see that too and add this new funcs to libnix as closedsource.
 
But ixemul have always this functions in and more and is opensource.
I think in such a small market few devs and so slow developing, closed source is not good, because every programmer can fix or enhance opensource soft he need faster and maybe more bugfree(when on the system very few betatester here and really motivate to test), because the closed source devs have so much other things to do.

------------

If i add the function atanf in libnix or ixemul because a Unix program need it, there is no diffrence.


And its also possible when a amiga program really not run with ixemul to change it so it work.When you want port it to libnix you must do the same.

http://www.unix.org/version3/apis/t_1.html

If this functions are link from a libnix or ixemul there is really no diffrence in functions.

And if something fail due to messaging can easy see when test and the program wait in endless loop

for example pthread programs do never work with amiga OS funcs and tasks and SDL, this have also nothing to do with ixemul or libnix.

amiga and pthread cant work.here always the program need change with libnix too.

but luckily many programs can compile without pthreeads.

But my plans are here too to change pthread that it work with amiga task and signalling whne there is a reason(program that really need it).
this help also get programs more easy working.

[itix]

I and i think many other dont know how auto open in libnix work.

Time to find it out then.

Most do the logical Amiga OS way, that is explain in RKM.Its really not much work to open a lib.there can also do a code snippet that open often needed aos libs.you need only paste it

but its really lots more easy to use way from RKM then port a big Linux program to work with a small libnix.

struct Library *AslBase:

AslBase = OpenLibrary("asl.library");

and at end of source or in a atexit func you need do

CloseLibrary(AslBase);

It is not enough for ports :-) I have created lots of shared libraries for MorphOS: powersdl.library, iconv.library, intl.library, hpdf.library, littlecms.library and many more which are used in my ports. When I am porting stuff from other systems (usually from Unix) I dont have to add code to open those libraries. It is done automatically for me.

You still have not written if the programs i post work on your MOS.Your excuse is only that this programs should not use with ixemul.

I dont have Internet at home (yet).

what do you say when a program use opengl functions that MOS tinygl not have.
Do you think this program should port so it work with the fewer functions of tinygl or its a shitty program ?

There is tinygl maintainer. When there is missing opengl call I ask what could be done about it. Sometimes there is workaround, sometimes tinygl maintainer adds missing functionality, sometimes I have to drop project.

enhance libnix is too possible but wy need not 2 big unix API(ixemul and libnix) i think.You yourself tell you want not use this shitty Un++ix Ports, but then i dont understand, wy MOS devs have add more functione to libnix to make porting more easy.

The official word is: do not used ixemul unless you know what you are doing.

more functions help more easy port programs.MOS devs see that too and add this new funcs to libnix as closedsource.

There is also clib2 developed by Olaf Barthel. It is open source. I dont know how well it compares with libnix but I think it is fairly good alternative solution.

[unusedunused]

>Time to find it out then.

and where is a program that use auto libopen as an example ?
I can then try out if it work with ixemul.

as far i know there is libauto.a for this.I think its really no problem of it not work in ixemul to add the code from libnix here too, if there is code in libnix to do that.

open a library by hand is not very complicate and need not much programming knowledge, its lots more work to change the program to use libnix, and btw when create a library then it must do always by hand.libauto cant work.

>There is tinygl maintainer. When there is missing opengl call I ask what could be done >about it. Sometimes there is workaround, sometimes tinygl maintainer adds missing >functionality, sometimes I have to drop project.

http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/TinyGL/

Do you mean this maintainer or do you mean MOS maintainer ?

And what do you do if this maintainer

http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/TinyGL/

update his tiny GL Version so its not compatible to MOS new stuff and increase lib number ?

Do you then tell him too he should rename his tinygl or should not increase lib Version ?

Bit i see diffrent on MOS sdl.its called powersdl and it is based on old SDL Version 1.2.6 that was here for AOS and AROS.You add new features, choose another name and version numbering as SDL.

But here i see you have add this new features in 1.2.13 and not say that a real good SDL Port can only done with powersdl in 1.2.6 state.

its really funny what funny reasons the MOS devs write and they want force ixemul not furtherdevelop.

Wy not do that in SDL too ?.SDL1.3 is release and support multiple windows.
Do you then too say, when a SDL program need that feature it is no good Port or program ?

wy not go to the sdl devs and tell them that they should rename their sdl instead that MOS sdl must called powersdl

its fact, ixemul is born on 68k and if you accept me as furtherdeveloper or not, you cant force that MOS devs are right when they want force that ixemul should stay forever on this low linux compatible level and instead should enhance libnix with more Linux funcs.

Most portet programs to MOS or OS4 and of course 68k are identical port Linix programs.
If your port SDL game work with ixemul or not, users do not notice.

So wy there must do much work to make this identical Ports working with the less featured libnix ?

When you tell me what functions MOS libnix have, then i also can add a compiler warning in ixemul when #define MOS_LIBNIX_COMPATIBLE

this help devs to make the program working on MOS.
but thats also simple to add, and i am sure, when not more funcs use as in libnix, then there cant more problems occur as in libnix.

the lib is called on MOS powersdl.library you yourself have written here

[unusedunused]

@Fab
Here i get a output what codecs are add in ffmpeg Version from MOS.

http://www.amiga-news.de/de/news/comments/thread/AN-2009-11-00044-DE.html

I do a filecompare with 68k ffmpeg from amistuff and see the MOS Version miss lots libs.so its clear it is smaller.

this libs are add automatic from ffmpeg makefile.

DEA    libamr_nb       libamr-nb Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) Narrow-Band
 DEA    libamr_wb       libamr-wb Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) Wide-Band
  EA    libfaac         libfaac AAC (Advanced Audio Codec)
 D A    libfaad         libfaad AAC (Advanced Audio Codec)
 DEA    libgsm          libgsm GSM
  EA    libmp3lame      libmp3lame MP3 (MPEG audio layer 3)
 D V    libopenjpeg     OpenJPEG based JPEG 2000 decoder
 D A    libspeex        libspeex Speex
  EV    libtheora       libtheora Theora
  EA    libvorbis       libvorbis Vorbis
  EV    libx264         libx264 H.264 / AVC / MPEG-4 AVC / MPEG-4 part 10
  EV    libxvid         libxvidcore MPEG-4 part 2
 
but all in all great what Fab do, get so much codecs work with libnix.
But this show more that Fab is a excellent coder or spend lots time and not that programming or porting for MOS is easy.

I code for amiga because it is not so much work as on windows/Linux to find bugs or program.and a AOS that need more work i dont want.

maybe you can release the source so can see what you change.
also dont forget to add in the next release of ffmpeg to add this 12 libs too in actual version

[Fab]

@Fab
Here i get a output what codecs are add in ffmpeg Version from MOS.

http://www.amiga-news.de/de/news/comments/thread/AN-2009-11-00044-DE.html

I do a filecompare with 68k ffmpeg from amistuff and see the MOS Version miss lots libs.so its clear it is smaller.

this libs are add automatic from ffmpeg makefile.

DEA    libamr_nb       libamr-nb Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) Narrow-Band
 DEA    libamr_wb       libamr-wb Adaptive Multi-Rate (AMR) Wide-Band
  EA    libfaac         libfaac AAC (Advanced Audio Codec)
 D A    libfaad         libfaad AAC (Advanced Audio Codec)
 DEA    libgsm          libgsm GSM
  EA    libmp3lame      libmp3lame MP3 (MPEG audio layer 3)
 D V    libopenjpeg     OpenJPEG based JPEG 2000 decoder
 D A    libspeex        libspeex Speex
  EV    libtheora       libtheora Theora
  EA    libvorbis       libvorbis Vorbis
  EV    libx264         libx264 H.264 / AVC / MPEG-4 AVC / MPEG-4 part 10
  EV    libxvid         libxvidcore MPEG-4 part 2
 
but all in all great what Fab do, get so much codecs work with libnix.
But this show more that Fab is a excellent coder or spend lots time and not that programming or porting for MOS is easy.

I code for amiga because it is not so much work as on windows/Linux to find bugs or program.and a AOS that need more work i dont want.

maybe you can release the source so can see what you change.
also dont forget to add in the next release of ffmpeg to add this 12 libs too in actual version

Remember this was a 5 minutes job, and that i didn't enable external libraries on purpose (most people use mencoder, anyway). For MPlayer and Mencoder, I have these libraries enabled (included libx264 and libxvidcore that also need some additional code for altivec autodetection, for example). But all these libraries mostly straight compile with libnix anyway.

And wtf with tinygl that would be bad because it lacks a function, or a powersdl game that would be bad because it's based on 1.2.6? Not everything requires the very last version to be usable, far from it. And it's way preferrable to have a fast OpenGL subset than a complete but amazingly slow MESA implementation.

[itix]

and where is a program that use auto libopen as an example ?

I dont know how it works in 68k but in MorphOS it works just like SAS/C constructors/destructors work.

Maybe this one: http://aminet.net/package/mus/play/ahxplay

There is libahxplay.c which could have auto-open feature. I can not verify this without having an access to my sources and I cant bother installing LhA unpacker to this XP machine.

btw when create a library then it must do always by hand.libauto cant work.

Actually it can work if you know how to make it work. Anyway, please dont tell me you are using ixemul in shared libraries.

Do you mean this maintainer or do you mean MOS maintainer ?

MorphOS maintainer.

And what do you do if this maintainer

http://fabrice.bellard.free.fr/TinyGL/

update his tiny GL Version so its not compatible to MOS new stuff and increase lib number ?

Apples and oranges. MorphOS TinyGL is heavily extended and pretty much only thing it has common with the original TinyGL is a name.

But even then, so what. The official SDL is maintained separately from PowerSDL. When there is new SDL version I maybe update PowerSDL on MorphOS. Or maybe not. It is up to me.

Bit i see diffrent on MOS sdl.its called powersdl and it is based on old SDL Version 1.2.6 that was here for AOS and AROS.You add new features, choose another name and version numbering as SDL.

There is good reason for that: I dont maintain Amiga SDL nor sdl.library. Thus any changes to sdl.library would be incompatible if Amiga SDL development was continued by its maintainer.

So wy there must do much work to make this identical Ports working with the less featured libnix ?

Ixemul is not safe.

its fact, ixemul is born on 68k and if you accept me as furtherdeveloper or not, you cant force that MOS devs are right when they want force that ixemul should stay forever on this low linux compatible level and instead should enhance libnix with more Linux funcs.

We cant force you to do anything but we would appreciate if there was more experienced developer maintaining 68k port.

[unusedunused]

>Ixemul is not safe.

thats no good argument, but i can easy say libnix is not so safe as ixemul .and i am fair and i show you a reason everybody can check.

try this example code  

string = malloc(;

strcpy(string,"123456789");

now with libnix you get memtrash and your program overwrite memory and crash sooner or later randomly.ixemul report this and upto 4 byte memtrash cant give system crashes.so a programmer notice this.so ixemul is more safe and bring no speedloss.
you can also get report when you use on libnix wipeout.But i see in your membenchmarks with running wipeout that your system slow down extrem.much more than winuae.

Try out a Program that use xml 2 or a C++ program.
Try out on your netsurf with running MOS wipeout memtracker.

http://www.aminet.net

and tell me the time how long your system need to show the page.i think it need more than 5 minutes.SO i guess when you develop netsurf or a C++ program you need not the recommended dev tools from Commodore to detect memtrash.

But now what test we should use to show that ixemul is not safe ?

maybe you can show me a Unix program that you think cant enhance with Amiga OS functions ?
the test is easy, i add then in a loop code that it frequently open and close a MUI gui win dow(more than 20* sec)

then we can run it on UAE and when it also run without deadlock or memory trash more than 2 hours can say ixemul is safe.

>We cant force you to do anything but we would appreciate if there was more experienced >developer maintaining 68k port

YOu should really try out ixemul V62 with more programs,then you see it run stable.Then use your MOS ixemul.I think you see this run not so stable.

but your only excuse is, that programs should not use ixemul and thats wrong.ixemul can do more than libnix and need not static link, so programs can be smaller.

if there was more experienced devloper that do that is nice, but when they only say we need no newer version the program should not use it help nothing.

Or when there are experienced devloper that do a better libnix only for a AOS that run on slow PPC Systems and this must buy.

A AOS that run not on fast and cheap hardware is not usefull for me.Wy i should use a slow system ?.Time is short and the fastest get for the money is the best.

And when my Hardware damage, i will in short time buy a new system.

>Remember this was a 5 minutes job,

where is the source so can see what you have change ?

when this is not much work, wy are the most important Ports done by OS developers on MOS ?

wy there come not so much from non OS developers ?

[unusedunused]

>Not everything requires the very last version to be usable, far from it. And it's way >preferrable to have a fast OpenGL subset than a complete but amazingly slow MESA >implementation.

there is not much speed differ, look at old benchmarks that show glide speed and opengl speed in some benchmarks with quake.

when the X86 CPU get more speed as 200 MHZ then the calling overhead of a full Mesa does not slowdown more than 5-10% and faster CPU glide and full opengl get more and more equal and thats the reason because tinygl or minigl is now not need and all modern systems have full Mesa

[unusedunused]

>(most people use mencoder, anyway).

really, i see this early GUI for MOS mencoder.

http://aminet.net/package/gfx/edit/mengui

for 68k there is a GUI that use argue and support many encoders, also ffmpeg

http://aminet.net/package/util/misc/ArgueGUIColl

[itix]

string = malloc(;

strcpy(string,"123456789");

now with libnix you get memtrash and your program overwrite memory and crash sooner or later randomly.ixemul report this.so a programmer notice this.so ixemul is more safe and bring no speedloss

Bleh. That is not safe. It is placebo. It can crash your system at any time. Ixemul can not magically trap malicious code.

But now what test we should use to show that ixemul is not safe ?

It just isnt. Do not mix ixemul with native Amiga API calls.

YOu should really try out ixemul V62 with more programs,then you see it run stable.Then use your MOS ixemul.I think you see this run not so stable.

I can not use your ixemul because it does not support PPC native callbacks (i.e. atexit(), obviously).

but your only excuse is, that programs should not use ixemul and thats wrong.ixemul can do more than libnix and need not static link, so programs can be smaller.

With ixemul you still have static linking because of stubs.