-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Date: 5 Dec 2009 00:02:27 +0100
From: Jammy <broadcast_j@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Name: Jammy
Email: broadcast_j@...
URL:
And even though I said the VGA is fine, i meant that the mode you used
is fine.  All the other modes don't work.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Date: 4 Dec 2009 23:21:46 +0100
From: Jammy <broadcast_j@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Name: Jammy
Email: broadcast_j@...
URL:
I can't seem to get the mouse working...The VGA is fine, but the mouse
just doesn't work.  It's always reported as 0,0. :(
Was there any Mouse.Initialize or something that I needed to do?

I have plans for this too.. dont worry. :)

David Jeske wrote:
>
>
> This is not worth worrying about in a project like this as it's a
> 'success failure'. Getting this project to a place where microsoft even
> notices it is a much bigger hurdle.
>
> If somehow another organization turned .NET into an actual threat to
> Microsoft, they are a business, and I can imagine them trying to use
> their leverage against that competitor. I can also imagine it not working.
>
> On Mon, Nov 23, 2009 at 2:19 AM, Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu <Chad@...
> <mailto:Chad@...>> wrote:
>
>     There is still a lot of fear about using .Net and the dangers with the
>     possibility that MS could cut off programmers. I myself don't think that
>     such a scenario is likely to happen, what is your take on this?
>
>
>

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20091101.EN.aspx
Date: 22 Nov 2009 18:08:33 +0100
From: Salem5 <salem5@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20091101.EN.aspx
Name: Salem5
Email: salem5@...
URL:
There is still a lot of fear about using .Net and the dangers with the
possibility that MS could cut off programmers. I myself don't think that
such a scenario is likely to happen, what is your take on this?

[01/11/2009] We're not dead! Try out the new and awesome Milestone 4!
For more info, look the Cosmos blog for the story and Release Vault for
the features.

I changed to to Nov 1. I know it was Nov 1, but Americans read month
then date, so to them it looks like Jan 11, which does make us look dead. :)

Please always use words for the month to avoid confusion, ie Nov, Dec, etc.

I have update QEmu to 0.11.0 and cygwin dll to the latest version.

Pleae get the latest version from Source Control explorer window (View-->Other
Windows-->Source Control Explorer). Right click on the IL2CPU server and select
Get Latest version.

NOT update only the source code, because the new version of QEmu need a fix on
MakeQEmuStep.cs I have checked-in and the older QEmu version might not work

Agree.

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com] On
>Behalf Of Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu
>Sent: Friday, November 20, 2009 3:11 PM
>To: Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [Cosmos-Dev] Re: Double support: x87 or SSE2?
>
>We dont need 486. For x86, we can safely assume min level of P3.
>
>Ben Kloosterman wrote:
>>
>>
>> I don't think there are many pre Pentium machines out there . Embedded
>> systems are going ARM.
>>
>>
>>
>> In addition if we go 486 we need to support AT Bus , PIC ( instead of
>> APIC) , AGP etc . These are major differences  to get power management
>> working you need full APIC support.
>>
>>
>>
>> Considering our resources I think we should limit ourselves to PCI ,
>MMX
>>  and APIC/ACPI  at a minimum everything else is fluff.  Personally I
>> would rather have x64 support than 486 .
>>
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>>
>> Ben
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *From:* Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com]
>> *On Behalf Of *Guilherme Melo
>> *Sent:* Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:54 PM
>> *To:* Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com
>> *Subject:* Re: [Cosmos-Dev] Re: Double support: x87 or SSE2?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> my best guess is that we should stick to compatibility first, then work
>> on SSE and/or x87.
>>
>>
>> On 19/11/2009 11:39, john_cena87_2004 wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>     well, so are you telling we must write both software, x87 and
>SSE(2)
>>     implementation and choose it by builder?
>>
>>     --- In Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com
>>     <mailto:Cosmos-Dev%40yahoogroups.com>, "john_cena87_2004"
>>     <john_cena87_2004@...> wrote:
>>      >
>>      > Float support is complete!
>>      > However, while SSE accelerates float arithmetics, doubles uses
>>     x87 instruction set.
>>      >
>>      > Now the dilemma:
>>      >
>>      > -->Should I convert double support using SSE2 and so Cosmos will
>>     require Pentium 4 era cpu and above
>>      >
>>      > -->it's ok x87 for double
>>      >
>>      > What is your opinion?
>>      >
>>
>>
>
>
>
>------------------------------------
>
>--------------------------------------------------
>More things to join for Cosmos!
>
>1) Cosmos chat room:
>http://tinyurl.com/pc7bds
>
>2) Please add yourself to the map:
>http://tinyurl.com/qhttde
>
>3) Help publicity and join our Facebook page:
>http://tinyurl.com/plrloa
>
>--------------------------------------------------
>
>Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>

We dont need 486. For x86, we can safely assume min level of P3.

Ben Kloosterman wrote:
>
>
> I don’t think there are many pre Pentium machines out there . Embedded
> systems are going ARM.
>
>
>
> In addition if we go 486 we need to support AT Bus , PIC ( instead of
> APIC) , AGP etc . These are major differences  to get power management
> working you need full APIC support.
>
>
>
> Considering our resources I think we should limit ourselves to PCI , MMX
>  and APIC/ACPI  at a minimum everything else is fluff.  Personally I
> would rather have x64 support than 486 .
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
>
>
> Ben
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com [mailto:Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com]
> *On Behalf Of *Guilherme Melo
> *Sent:* Thursday, November 19, 2009 9:54 PM
> *To:* Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [Cosmos-Dev] Re: Double support: x87 or SSE2?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> my best guess is that we should stick to compatibility first, then work
> on SSE and/or x87.
>
>
> On 19/11/2009 11:39, john_cena87_2004 wrote:
>
>
>
>     well, so are you telling we must write both software, x87 and SSE(2)
>     implementation and choose it by builder?
>
>     --- In Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com
>     <mailto:Cosmos-Dev%40yahoogroups.com>, "john_cena87_2004"
>     <john_cena87_2004@...> wrote:
>      >
>      > Float support is complete!
>      > However, while SSE accelerates float arithmetics, doubles uses
>     x87 instruction set.
>      >
>      > Now the dilemma:
>      >
>      > -->Should I convert double support using SSE2 and so Cosmos will
>     require Pentium 4 era cpu and above
>      >
>      > -->it's ok x87 for double
>      >
>      > What is your opinion?
>      >
>
>

 

well, so are you telling we must write both software, x87 and SSE(2) implementation and choose it by builder?

--- In Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com, "john_cena87_2004" <john_cena87_2004@...> wrote:
>
> Float support is complete!
> However, while SSE accelerates float arithmetics, doubles uses x87 instruction set.
>
> Now the dilemma:
>
> -->Should I convert double support using SSE2 and so Cosmos will require Pentium 4 era cpu and above
>
> -->it's ok x87 for double
>
> What is your opinion?
>

well, so are you telling we must write both software, x87 and SSE(2)
implementation and choose it by builder?


--- In Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com, "john_cena87_2004" <john_cena87_2004@...>
wrote:
>
> Float support is complete!
> However, while SSE accelerates float arithmetics, doubles uses x87 instruction
set.
>
> Now the dilemma:
>
> -->Should I convert double support using SSE2 and so Cosmos will require
Pentium 4 era cpu and above
>
> -->it's ok x87 for double
>
> What is your opinion?
>

 

ah. However SSE advantages are not fully utlized, like packed calculation..even if there are those opcodes. Should we use it? --- Gio 19/11/09, john_cena87_2004 <john_cena87_2004@yahoo.it> ha scritto: Da: john_cena87_2004 <john_cena87_2004@yahoo.it> Oggetto: [Cosmos-Dev] Double support: x87 or SSE2? A: Cosmos-Dev@yahoogroups.com Data: Giovedì 19 novembre 2009, 13:39   Float support is complete! However, while SSE accelerates float arithmetics, doubles uses x87 instruction set. Now the dilemma: -->Should I convert double support using SSE2 and so Cosmos will require Pentium 4 era cpu and above -->it's ok x87 for double What is your opinion?

Float support is complete!
However, while SSE accelerates float arithmetics, doubles uses x87 instruction
set.

Now the dilemma:

-->Should I convert double support using SSE2 and so Cosmos will require Pentium
4 era cpu and above

-->it's ok x87 for double

What is your opinion?

its from CP.. you can reply to thim there.

Matthijs ter Woord wrote:
>
>
> ask for a small sample snippet..
>
> On Sat, Nov 14, 2009 at 4:20 PM, Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu <Chad@...
> <mailto:Chad@...>> wrote:
>
>
>
>     -------- Original Message --------
>     Subject:        New Issue: IL2CPU.Assembler.ProcessField failed
>     [Cosmos: 9188]
>     Date:   14 Nov 2009 07:12:02 -0800
>     From:   notifications@... <mailto:notifications@...>
>     To:     chad@... <mailto:chad@...>
>
>
>
>     User br_chiang <http://www.codeplex.com/site/users/view/br_chiang
>     <http://www.codeplex.com/site/users/view/br_chiang>> has
>     proposed the new Issue: IL2CPU.Assembler.ProcessField failed.
>
>     "When I was building a [clean] (just copied from CodePlex) source code,
>     it failed on Cosmos Builder, tracing indicated the "xData[x] =
>     Marshal.ReadByte(xValue, x);" statement (Source version 46057,
>     Assembler.cs, Line 674, Col 21) has thrown an ArgumentException:
>     P/Invoke convertion does not exist when passing value to Object-typed
>     parameter (or something else like that).
>
>     Any one experienced the problem during building?"
>
>     View the full issue online
>     <http://cosmos.codeplex.com/WorkItem/View.aspx?WorkItemId=9188
>     <http://cosmos.codeplex.com/WorkItem/View.aspx?WorkItemId=9188>>.
>
>     You are receiving this email because you are tracking this work item on
>     Cosmos <http://cosmos.codeplex.com/ <http://cosmos.codeplex.com/>>.
>     You can unsubscribe at
>     codeplex.com <http://codeplex.com>
>     <https://cosmos.codeplex.com/subscriptions/workitem/project/edit
>     <https://cosmos.codeplex.com/subscriptions/workitem/project/edit>>. This
>     is an unmonitored account.
>
>
>
>     ------------------------------------
>
>     --------------------------------------------------
>     More things to join for Cosmos!
>
>     1) Cosmos chat room:
>     http://tinyurl.com/pc7bds <http://tinyurl.com/pc7bds>
>
>     2) Please add yourself to the map:
>     http://tinyurl.com/qhttde <http://tinyurl.com/qhttde>
>
>     3) Help publicity and join our Facebook page:
>     http://tinyurl.com/plrloa <http://tinyurl.com/plrloa>
>
>     --------------------------------------------------
>
>     Yahoo! Groups Links
>
>
>        (Yahoo! ID required)
>
>        Cosmos-Dev-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
>     <mailto:Cosmos-Dev-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com>
>
>
>
>

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:  New Issue: IL2CPU.Assembler.ProcessField failed [Cosmos: 9188]
Date:  14 Nov 2009 07:12:02 -0800
From:  notifications@...
To:  chad@...



User br_chiang <http://www.codeplex.com/site/users/view/br_chiang> has
proposed the new Issue: IL2CPU.Assembler.ProcessField failed.

"When I was building a [clean] (just copied from CodePlex) source code,
it failed on Cosmos Builder, tracing indicated the "xData[x] =
Marshal.ReadByte(xValue, x);" statement (Source version 46057,
Assembler.cs, Line 674, Col 21) has thrown an ArgumentException:
P/Invoke convertion does not exist when passing value to Object-typed
parameter (or something else like that).

Any one experienced the problem during building?"

View the full issue online
<http://cosmos.codeplex.com/WorkItem/View.aspx?WorkItemId=9188>.

You are receiving this email because you are tracking this work item on
Cosmos <http://cosmos.codeplex.com/>. You can unsubscribe at
codeplex.com
<https://cosmos.codeplex.com/subscriptions/workitem/project/edit>. This
is an unmonitored account.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [syslinux] Syslinux set vesa mode
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 2009 20:29:16 -0800
From: H. Peter Anvin <hpa@...>
To: For discussion of Syslinux and tftp-hpa <syslinux@...>
CC: Chad@..., matthijsterwoord@...
References:
<935591170911120551n5ccc0098s4c38e5dd4e2fa435@...>
<4AFC2949.7060102@...> <4AFC2CA7.3090201@...>
<935591170911120847p301f9ab7q9d4e6906e48f050@...>
<4AFCF864.3020708@...>
<935591170911130017w1c75aba4xd0896d9b455963e6@...>
<4AFD1A8B.7000402@...>
<935591170911130237k3ffb634cyb47373b0ba5d02cc@...>
<4AFD95E4.5090601@...> <4AFDCCF6.4030004@...>

On 11/13/2009 01:17 PM, Chad Z. Hower aka Kudzu wrote:
> I'm asking. :)

Okay, this has been implemented *but not tested*.

Grab 3.84-pre2 or the git tree and test it out for me, please.

	 -hpa

--
H. Peter Anvin, Intel Open Source Technology Center
I work for Intel.  I don't speak on their behalf.

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20091101.EN.aspx
Date: 13 Nov 2009 00:19:32 +0100
From: jdomz <justchat_1@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20091101.EN.aspx
Name: jdomz
Email: justchat_1@...
URL:
Wow very impressive!!  i would love to help out turning this basic
support into higher level graphics-> Any chance image support will be
added?  Maybe (http://freeimage.sourceforge.net/)?

Will also be joining the mailing list :)

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Date: 11 Nov 2009 13:55:11 +0100
From: Tomi <tomijrinne@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Name: Tomi
Email: tomijrinne@...
URL: http://domiser.co.cc
Hi guys! You should make a package what keeps anykind of tutorials and
demos inside of it. Not just a devkit.
Greetings from Finland!

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Date: 11 Nov 2009 14:03:08 +0100
From: Tomi <tomijrinne@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20090520.EN.aspx
Name: Tomi
Email: tomijrinne@...
URL: http://domiser.co.cc
By the way, is possible to run .com or .bat -console programs inside of
this?

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: [Comment] http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20091101.EN.aspx
Date: 10 Nov 2009 17:02:00 +0100
From: noobzor <ainhee22@...>
To: chad@...

http://www.gocosmos.org/Blog/20091101.EN.aspx
Name: noobzor
Email: ainhee22@...
URL:
Hi,

I would like to join the team on developing the OS. I am willing to
spend my time on developing the project. As of the moment I have no
work/job so I want to dedicate all my time and knowledge on the said
project. I have a strong knowledge on C# and WPF so that won't be
problem to me.

Thanks