[openbeos] Re: Hi from the PetrOS camp.

  • From: "Michael Phipps" <mphipps1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 09 Nov 2001 01:03:23 -0500

>A kernel is just another software module. It provides services and interacts
>with the rest of the operating system through a defined set of interfaces.
>As such, a kernel should be plug, reboot and play.
>
>Having a PetrOS or BlueOS or BeOS kernel should not be a problem for a clean
>operating system.
>
>The advantages of a commercial OS kernel are 'appearances' to business and
>an experienced kernel now. As well as all the driver support for that kernel
>and OpenBeOS combined.
>
>PetrOS also supports Win32 programs and with a Win32 App Server (USER.DLL
>COMMCTRL.DLL etc) it would appeal to people who still use office.
>
>An official Open Source OpenBeOS kernel, would still be developed.
>
>The user could then choose there kernel, based on use, cost, support etc. We
>will have to write a boot loader and it can choose the kernel as it loads.
>
>No need to downplay the contributions of others, even if its off the map a
>little.
>
>While I'm at it lets not forget BlueOS is also working to create a BeOS
>derivative. There is a lot of code to share. ( A GPL server is not a
>licensing issue. )

Umm - be careful here. GPL != MIT. GPL code can not (and will not) be 
incorporated with
OBOS. It would certainly be possible to bundle GPL licensed apps (as Be did). 
However,
sharing code is a whole different matter. I don't think that you meant what I 
am warning 
against, Matthew (Matt?), but others might take your comment out of context, so 
I want
to clarify that. :-) 


Other related posts: