Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

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

Members: 2
Guests: 1

Allanon, wawa, more...

Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users



(1) 2 »


ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2007/4/16 6:26
From Norway
Group:
Member
Posts: 4010
Offline
After all the years I wonder if ABI v.1 could now be considered a stable branch or will be broken again?

From my point of view this must happen now or very soon before all Amigans die ;)

Posted on: 3/7 7:39
_________________
www.aspireos.com
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2010/8/30 7:20
Group:
Member
Posts: 1194
Offline
not all "amigans" (what a word!) are aros fans. and whether they die out or not we wont probably notice (on our own life support).

but seriously, none will definitely answer that question i guess - the progress on abiv1 is almost on hold, considering that the most essential developers are on leave.

we need to adopt to that situation flexibly. the remaining option is to hold on to x86 abiv0 and what it offers. at least thats my "practical" reasoning.

Posted on: 3/7 8:02
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2007/4/16 6:26
From Norway
Group:
Member
Posts: 4010
Offline
wawa: Yes, thank you for the answer. What is little anoying is that there are no commits to abi v.0 and therefore no progress. Sure like Deadwood did it is possible to backport but for how long is this going to be the situation. It is confusing and anoying. This situation has in many cases split some of the developers. Deadwood might not have left if it where not for all this mess.
It is just as shame after all these years that we come to this point where most of the main developers has left. When I first
got interested in AROS it was alpha state but now it is real good and with the right hardware and works as a mothern computer for most normal tasks. Sure needs some love here and there but AROS has come a loooong way. I would say so long way that if someone updated our gfx system to support more advanced gfx chips we could be in for some real serious interest.

Posted on: 3/7 8:24
_________________
www.aspireos.com
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2010/5/18 11:49
From Italy
Group:
Member
Posts: 1019
Offline
but then the branch abiv0 is concluded? apart from the open bounties for some things to improve.

Posted on: 3/7 9:11
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2010/10/7 15:30
Group:
Member
Posts: 691
Offline
A move to AbiV1?

Posted on: 3/7 9:21
_________________
http://www.hollywood-mal.com/
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2010/5/18 11:49
From Italy
Group:
Member
Posts: 1019
Offline
I think when it's ready....

Posted on: 3/7 11:04
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2004/10/30 17:13
From Ireland
Group:
Member
Posts: 2794
Offline
ABIv1 is unstable in two senses. Firstly, the targets that were set to consider it "ready"/"stable" have not been reached yet. Secondly, the PC-native versions of ABIv1 have regressions in hardware support compared to ABIv0.

In the last few weeks I've been trying to address the second problem above. After that's done, we can move forward in other ways, including addressing the first problem above.

Posted on: 3/7 14:27
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2007/4/16 6:26
From Norway
Group:
Member
Posts: 4010
Offline
Thanks Neil. Seams like a good plan :) I will for sure test abi v.1 on lots of hardware when your changes been submitted and sourceforge is up again.

Posted on: 3/7 14:51
_________________
www.aspireos.com
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2004/4/7 4:26
Group:
Member
Posts: 4427
Offline
As I already expressed in the past, IMHO there is no practical need for a i386 v1 version of AROS. Moreover, it would be a complete regression to current users, unless all current 3rd party applications, which have been already available for years, get recompiled in a short time.

In theory a i386 v1 version of AROS would bring fresher code, some enhancement under the hood, and no support - for instance - to SMP and other fancy features AROS should bring. 32-bit only processors are also now obsolete, getting more difficult to find and lesser useable for attractive modern tasks. That's why, I confirm, I won't spend a minute of my time on a 32-bit ABIv1 version of Icaros.

Since you have to loose compatibility with current apps, at least loose it for something useful! Switching to ABIv1 64-bit with SMP enabled, for instance, makes far mooooore sense to me. You still have the 3rd party application issue as well, but at least users get actual ADVANTAGES from the switch.

Posted on: 3/8 1:50
_________________
p.bes
Icaros Desktop AROS distribution mantainer
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer


Re: ABI v.1 stable or not

Joined:
2010/5/18 11:49
From Italy
Group:
Member
Posts: 1019
Offline
I agree, however, there are still 32-bit systems of all respect, which save enough money, then as I understand it is lacking human resources to accelerate the time for new branches and then we are still the stable branch abiv0.

hi all

Posted on: 3/8 2:08
Transfer the post to other applications Transfer



(1) 2 »



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
4427
2 magorium
magorium
4095
3 nikolaos
nikolaos
4010
4 phoenixkonsole
phoenixkonsole
3920
5 deadwood
deadwood
2917
6 ncafferkey
ncafferkey
2794
7 mazze
mazze
2221
8 clusteruk
clusteruk
2112
9 damocles
damocles
1789
10 BSzili
BSzili
1511
© 2004-2018 AROS Exec