167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 05 November 2012 - 07:39 PM
my point is look at Linux.
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?)
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:17 PM
any crappy OS will be buried in the programs section until the owner gives up and stops bumping it, or a moderator locks it due to it attracting spam ;_;
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
389 posts
Location
Norway
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:21 PM
any crappy OS will be buried in the programs section until the owner gives up and stops bumping it, or a moderator locks it due to it attracting spam ;_;
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
I dont see why a OS should have new "games", it should however have better UI, shell, or be a complete rewrite of the bios.lua and shell.
992 posts
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:36 PM
I dont see why a OS should have new "games", it should however have better UI, shell, or be a complete rewrite of the bios.lua and shell.
I think bios and shell should not be altered as this makes it unable to be run on servers without affecting all computers not just your own computer.
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.
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:38 PM
i dont get why you would edit bios.lua anyways
389 posts
Location
Norway
Posted 05 November 2012 - 08:39 PM
yeah, i am a huge fan of not messing with stuff to make it forced onto all users :P/>/>
818 posts
Posted 05 November 2012 - 09:08 PM
Yeah like keep the os'es to extensions, it will make ability for all basic program to work on that os as well. Then if you want to be able to give multiple letters to read or something like that, then code it into your OS. But a OS doesn't need to edit bios.lua
514 posts
Location
Over there
Posted 06 November 2012 - 03:56 AM
We're entering the age of graphical and mouse-controlled OSes, have fun!
Also too many crappy program collections pretending to be an OS.
818 posts
Posted 06 November 2012 - 05:36 AM
then you take it to the perspective. Why defuq would someone really skilled in programing program his 5000 lines OS in a computer that's merged into a game. CC is all about fun not making something as successful as windows and selling it to earn tons.
514 posts
Location
Over there
Posted 06 November 2012 - 05:47 AM
By the way, successful does not mean good, don't attempt to remake Windows.
1214 posts
Location
The Sammich Kingdom
Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:02 AM
By the way, successful does not mean good, don't attempt to remake Windows.
Why would we want to remake Windows? I'll stick with Linux(Even though I am using Windows to post this :P/>/>).
167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 06 November 2012 - 06:03 AM
Yeah, a OS doesn't need to edit the main console.lua.
537 posts
Location
Copenhagen, Denmark
Posted 06 November 2012 - 07:07 AM
Linux is(in my mind), the best operating system!
1619 posts
Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:17 PM
i dont get why you would edit bios.lua anyways
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
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 06 November 2012 - 02:22 PM
i dont get why you would edit bios.lua anyways
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.
yea, bios.lua souldnt be rom only, it sould just be copied to every new computer :/
167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:02 PM
Mmm. Linux is good.
167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 06 November 2012 - 08:04 PM
I think it's worth trying to get people to rename their program collection to distribution rather then OS
423 posts
Location
AfterLifeLochie's "Dungeon", Australia
Posted 06 November 2012 - 11:57 PM
I think it depends on your definition of "operating system" in contrast with "shell".
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.
167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 07 November 2012 - 07:53 PM
That's the post we needed!
1111 posts
Location
Portland OR
Posted 07 November 2012 - 09:50 PM
i dont get why you would edit bios.lua anyways
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]
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 08 November 2012 - 09:38 AM
well craftOS isnt a os at all its just a name to fit in with the minecraft realm
and the only thing you sould be editing bios.lua for is for preventing spam and some neat hooks
423 posts
Location
AfterLifeLochie's "Dungeon", Australia
Posted 08 November 2012 - 10:10 AM
well craftOS isnt a os at all its just a name to fit in with the minecraft realm
and the only thing you sould be editing bios.lua for is for preventing spam and some neat hooks
i dont get why you would edit bios.lua anyways
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.
<snip>
PixelToast; the combination of the BIOS and the shell make CraftOS. Bear in mind, the BIOS itself is in fact the Lua VM (and CC's base code, which we can't modify), and the BIOS file. The combination of the three (the LuaVM, the BIOS and the default shell) make up the entire operating system. Any other replacement "shell" isn't considered an OS, as it's a bit like running CYGWIN on a Windows system; it's not an OS, but it's an implementation of the Nix shell on Windows.
More to the point, the BIOS file itself is incredibly powerful. Not only is it the place to install anti-spam and a way of securing CraftOS, it can actually change the entire structure and behaviour of CraftOS. You can wrap, replace, overwrite and protect practically any function and API, as well as a variety of other interface changes securely from the client machine (assuming you don't expose your objects into the global space!).
In addition, you don't need to edit the
bios.lua file to do this. Doing it in
startup, and then handing off to an alternate shell which behaves differently and uses the changed functionality and support from your pseudo-BIOS script works fine too.
123 posts
Posted 08 November 2012 - 08:21 PM
any crappy OS will be buried in the programs section until the owner gives up and stops bumping it, or a moderator locks it due to it attracting spam ;_;
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
I dont see why a OS should have new "games", it should however have better UI, shell, or be a complete rewrite of the bios.lua and shell.
this. Just bundling tons of programs does not make your code a "os".
167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 09 November 2012 - 07:45 PM
Bundling programs is a distribution.
2217 posts
Location
3232235883
Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:31 PM
Bundling programs is a distribution.
*caugh* redworks *caugh*
1111 posts
Location
Portland OR
Posted 09 November 2012 - 08:39 PM
Bundling programs is a distribution.
*caugh* redworks *caugh*
*cough* not a true os *cough*
167 posts
Location
District52
Posted 11 November 2012 - 08:48 PM
Cough cough cough.
Argh I'm choking…..