Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!
Main Menu
Who's Online
2 user(s) are online (1 user(s) are browsing Forum)

Members: 1
Guests: 1

ntromans, more...

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



(1) 2 3 4 ... 10 »


ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2012/4/16 8:41
From Brindisi (Italy)
Group:
Member
Posts: 1229
Offline
Qualcuno potrebbe spiegare in parole povere, cosa è ABIv1 e la differenza tecnica fra ABIv0 e ABIv1.

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

Could someone please explain in simple terms, what is ABIv1 and technical difference between ABIv1 and ABIv0.

Posted on: 2013/4/7 13:38
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2009/9/27 22:09
Group:
Member
Posts: 1056
Offline
I'm not sure if this document is up to date, but it comments on the progress of the ABIv1 components.

http://aros.sourceforge.net/documenta ... ications/drafts/abiv1.php

Posted on: 2013/4/7 14:10
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
In additional to that, see abiv1 developer wiki.

Posted on: 2013/4/7 14:15
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2012/4/27 12:29
From Stockholm, Sweden
Group:
Member
Posts: 759
Offline
From what I understand, the real difference is how solutions are implemented. In ABIv0 you have to take backward compatability into account but not with ABIv1. The latter takes no such considerations in order to test different solutions. The plus side is that you only have to think about how to make the code work. The negative side is that there is no garuantee that any program will work from update to update without recompiling everything.

In ABIv0 your older AROS programs should work, but they will probably not after a couple of updates with ABIv1.

Or am I wrong here?

Posted on: 2013/4/7 14:20
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
not totally wrong, as that is how things are atm. But when you take a good look then you see that aros vision is based on abi v1... and in that regards it must be compatible on a certain level (with classic os). Beyond that, anything goes

Posted on: 2013/4/7 14:29
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2012/4/27 12:29
From Stockholm, Sweden
Group:
Member
Posts: 759
Offline
Well, since thats the point of AROS then of course :)

But it's true that it's not compatible with itself right? Not as a must that is?

Posted on: 2013/4/7 14:32
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
Quote:
But it's true that it's not compatible with itself right? Not as a must that is?

thanks to the other thread with the nice link from cavemann i read this reply from Neil that i think says it all (please read the post to let this quote make some sense).

Quote:
ncafferkey wrote:
That's only a useful side effect of the splitting of AROS into ABIv1 and ABIv0 branches: it's not by design.


It's not compatible, but more by accident. And sure if it would evolve further (perhaps even like memory protection and/or supoprt for multiple cores/threads) it _could_ become even more incompatble. But at the same time developers want to decide at a certain point the switch to abiv1 (and that day isnt any time soon i guess because of work that still needs to be done to make the abi static enough again).

Posted on: 2013/4/7 15:07
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2012/4/27 12:29
From Stockholm, Sweden
Group:
Member
Posts: 759
Offline
Then we are saying the same thing, using different words.

Does that mean that ABIv1 wont be back ported to ABIv0 in the future and just replace it?

Posted on: 2013/4/7 15:12
_________________
"If I only got 640 kb of RAM I could rule the world."
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2011/6/30 19:50
Group:
Member
Posts: 4095
Offline
@yasu:
i guess we are talking about the same thing then

Well, i am not an expert on this, but quite frankly some of the backports done recently surprised me a little.

So my guess would be that if a developer is up to it _and_ it is possible to do that things are backported for as long as it can.

Some fixes are impossible to backport (abiv1 related functionality) or are not worth it. Most fixes however make it back to the v0 branch (sooner or later). But that is just from recent observations.

I would guess that the developers themselves are sometimes in limbo as well (or are bugged too often by us to fix certain (broken) things).

But yes, afaik there comes a time when the harsh decision is being made to switch over and abiv1 becomes abiv0 and a new abiv1 is started again.

There is no other way to do that because of abi incompatibilities that _require_ current software to be re-compiled for the new abi (and makes all softwate compiled for the old abi incompatible to run).

Ofcourse this transition could be made more smoother by already compiling some of the current existing software for abiv1 and when the switch comes all is ready to serve.

But as it is now, the current v1 abi will change in such a way that if you would compile it now, it needs be done next week, and the week therafter etc.

This is ofcourse no problem for the automatic builds that are in the nightlies but is very tiresome to do for someone preparing a distro based on abiv1 or all the software that is available in the archives.

Not to mention explaining things to newcomers that no software available in archives/aminet will not run on their v1 distro and current working software stops working when for example the v1 kernel is being updated (as f.e. icaros/aspiros do every once in a while).

That what i described can be seen in the work from Olafs3 (vision). sometimes when you replace the kickstarts/system files from vision with those from the nightlies then all kind of wierd things start to happen and/or stop working (or the opposite, it did not work but updating does make it work ).

so much for ramblings again, thanks for listening

Posted on: 2013/4/7 16:32
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABIv0 Vs ABIv1

Joined:
2009/9/27 22:09
Group:
Member
Posts: 1056
Offline
Quote:

magorium wrote:
But yes, afaik there comes a time when the harsh decision is being made to switch over and abiv1 becomes abiv0 and a new abiv1 is started again.



I'm no expert... But I think ABIv1 will never become ABIv0. ABIv0 will become deprecated when ABIv1 is frozen, and no more work will be done on ABIv0. If ABIv1 is frozen before all the scheduled work is done then what remains will be rescheduled to be completed with the items to be done in ABIv2.

Posted on: 2013/4/7 16:46
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer



(1) 2 3 4 ... 10 »



You can view topic.
You cannot start a new topic.
You cannot reply to posts.
You cannot edit your posts.
You cannot delete your posts.
You cannot add new polls.
You cannot vote in polls.
You cannot attach files to posts.
You cannot post without approval.

[Advanced Search]


Search
Top Posters
1 paolone
paolone
4434
2 magorium
magorium
4095
3 nikolaos
nikolaos
4028
4 phoenixkonsole
phoenixkonsole
3929
5 deadwood
deadwood
2917
6 ncafferkey
ncafferkey
2796
7 mazze
mazze
2221
8 clusteruk
clusteruk
2112
9 damocles
damocles
1789
10 BSzili
BSzili
1513
© 2004-2018 AROS Exec