Topaz font and diskfont.library

[Daedalus]

If you're using an OS-supplied version of the command then I would expect so. You could ask Cloanto and see what they say - perhaps they've changed their mind, or maybe for a non-commercial project it might not require a fee. But it might be worth trying an alternative Echo command from AROS, ARP or elsewhere (or even roll your own) to avoid any potential issues entirely.

[redblade]

Originally Posted by aNdy/AL/COS

I'm soon releasing my puzzle game, Spheroid, which is on a booting disk. I've used 'ECHO' in the startup-sequence to print a 'loading' message to an AmigaOS window before the game takes over.

Would including 'ECHO' in my 'c' drawer be subject to possibly similar licensing issues as the 'diskfont.library' as described above? I never really thought about it before...

The game is being distributed for free on itch.io, but there will be a 'donation' type button to cover some costs I incurred in resurrecting my real hardware.

Are you doing anything fancy with your 'ECHO' i.e 'c:echo $kickstart $workbench' or is it just normal text between quotation marks. If it's normal text there should be easy replacement on aminet or you can use a app like clitext which turns a ASCII file into a binary.

[aNdy/AL/COS]

Thanks for the replies, both.

ECHO is only being used to print a simple message to the screen, nothing fancy. I already see a few replacements on Aminet, so I'll go with one of them so as to not incur the wrath of anyone! Although maybe I could do something myself, but then feature creep!

[DisasterIncarna]

there is https://aminet.net/package/util/batch/mecho - needs OS2 and above tho.
https://aminet.net/package/util/batch/SuperEcho says "all amigas"

[aNdy/AL/COS]

Thanks, I test those also!

[Photon]

Originally Posted by aNdy/AL/COS

I'm soon releasing my puzzle game, Spheroid, which is on a booting disk. I've used 'ECHO' in the startup-sequence to print a 'loading' message to an AmigaOS window before the game takes over.

Would including 'ECHO' in my 'c' drawer be subject to possibly similar licensing issues as the 'diskfont.library' as described above? I never really thought about it before...

The game is being distributed for free on itch.io, but there will be a 'donation' type button to cover some costs I incurred in resurrecting my real hardware.

This is not what the thread is about.

On the topic of "I want my computer to print a string of text", yes, by all means use a replacement. It's a few minutes of work to write an executable that types a string argument to the default output (CLI), there should be plenty and with more features. That can never be licensable.

Overall though, I wouldn't hesitate to copy WB executables in the c: folder to distributable floppy disks or images. The OS is expressly written to require this - i.e. the executables are not built into ROM, they are on disk, so there is no other option, if OS authors expect users to use the machines the OS is for.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by redblade

Are you doing anything fancy with your 'ECHO' i.e 'c:echo $kickstart $workbench' or is it just normal text between quotation marks. If it's normal text there should be easy replacement on aminet or you can use a app like clitext which turns a ASCII file into a binary.

It is not up to commands to substitute variables. The shell does that upfront before the command even sees them - and thus even the most primitive implementation of "echo" would do that. However, would it not be easier if your program would write that string itself?

[Daedalus]

Originally Posted by Photon

Overall though, I wouldn't hesitate to copy WB executables in the c: folder to distributable floppy disks or images. The OS is expressly written to require this - i.e. the executables are not built into ROM, they are on disk, so there is no other option, if OS authors expect users to use the machines the OS is for.

That's the sensible way of looking at it, but I get the whole where do you draw the line issue... How much of OS 3.2 software components can you include before it becomes 3.2, for example, so people with Kickstart 3.1 get a free upgrade with a game?

I don't know Hyperion's stance on this for the newer releases, but I do know that Cloanto were definitely looking for a licence fee for a commercial distribution containing a couple of files from the Workbench 1.3 disk.

[Thomas Richter]

From 2.0 onwards "Echo" is a shell-builtin and thus not required as an external command. Reimplementing it would be fairly trivial, however. This is probably even on 1.3 a three-liner. Take the arguments, open the dos.library, use write() to write them out. Done.

Variable substitution is even done by the shell before, so no worries there.

[Photon]

If any release for the Amiga requires any other file required by WB to run under any KS ROM, you are automatically right. The reason is that judges aren't technical idiots now, and any suit would be quickly viewed as the OS being used as ransomware. It can be quickly demonstrated that a program written for AmigaOS cannot be distributed for the OS and run correctly without including the files.

There are plenty of alternative commands now, and as commands are moved out of ROM there will be more opportunity to build better commands with fewer requirements.

[Daedalus]

The answer there is "boot from your Workbench disk first", which is the clunky solution we ended up going with, as well as providing a readme on how to copy the three files from Workbench to the game disk to enable self-booting.

Most of the replacement commands I tried required KS 2.0, and we wanted to be able to self-boot on 1.3.

[redblade]

Originally Posted by Daedalus

The answer there is "boot from your Workbench disk first", which is the clunky solution we ended up going with, as well as providing a readme on how to copy the three files from Workbench to the game disk to enable self-booting.

Most of the replacement commands I tried required KS 2.0, and we wanted to be able to self-boot on 1.3.

Would be interested to know what these files were?

I'm guessing they were files from libs:, devs: and l:?

I know there is a public alternative to 'loadwb' out there.

[malko]

Originally Posted by Daedalus

[...] But in more recent times I had this issue with Dodgy Rocks, and Cloanto were asking for a $99 licence fee to include diskfont.library and the Assign command from OS 1.3... Hence it was released without being bootable. [...]

[Daedalus]

Yup, those two files, and I think there was another that was a nice-to-have that I can't recall now.

[E-Penguin]

Did ARP not have suitable replacements? It seems to cover most things

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by E-Penguin

Did ARP not have suitable replacements? It seems to cover most things

Apparently:


http://aminet.net/package/misc/antiq/ARP_13


However, I wonder why the OP does not simply create a workbench installer?

[Daedalus]

Originally Posted by E-Penguin

Did ARP not have suitable replacements? It seems to cover most things

To be honest, ARP passed me by and I only learned about it long after I needed it. I had tried a couple of other replacements from various sources including Aminet work-alikes and AROS, however they tended to require Kickstart 2+, which mostly defeated the purpose of creating a self-booting disk.

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

However, I wonder why the OP does not simply create a workbench installer?

Because sometimes the target machine for a project is an unexpanded A500, in which case providing a self-booting disk is the most convenient option, and even expected.

[aNdy/AL/COS]

@Photon...

I know that this thread was not originally to do with what I was asking, but I thought it was a parallel to what the original thread became, a discussion about the legality of certain libraries or other files being included on bootable disks 'released' by us small-time devs.

I apologise to you and 'madaxe' for taking the thread off course slightly, it was not my intention.

Just to be thorough, a few weeks ago I contacted Cloanto about the legality of including 'ECHO' on the release disk for my game and have heard absolutely nothing from them. Good job I found an alternative anyway...

[Photon]

Originally Posted by Thomas Richter

However, I wonder why the OP does not simply create a workbench installer?

There's the school of packaging and the school of Installers (mostly unpacking and copying files that you might not already have).

Both are newschool/oldschool depending on how you look at it, so there's no "vs." just the desire to finish a release and package it with all it needs. At one end, it's a single executable file which decompresses itself to memory and runs. At the other end, it's a script with any files it needs as an archive. (I.e. the code isn't even compiled.) OK, there's an even lazier way (as in even less work needed) for compiled programs: the program is released as source only, do it yourself, there's your installer.

The preferred type depends on the size and dependencies of the program, and whether it should be portable (not port-able - as in apps you can copy without needing accounts, installers, etc.)

Among these options, the Windows way was never the way. (A five-step installer for a small, simple utility, which probably needs your this and that plus 17 versions of .NET.) An extreme version of the installer type of distribution.

On most OSes, if an installer would overwrite an existing library or similar, it could affect and potentially wreck in principle all other programs installed on that OS. This has also in fact happened.

When choosing the type of distribution then, the fewer the dependencies required outside the executable (ideally none), the more users will be able to try the software before choosing to run any install scripts.

Installation requires some form of permanent storage, and most Amiga models were sold without one. Being able to run the software without installation means that users who haven't, won't have to buy a HDD just to run your program (or set up similar in software/hardware emulations).

No installation means among other things, that Amiga programs can run on a mobile phone. It is up to the difficulty of emulation there. It's normally very difficult to set up a permanent storage here; like some emus "barely good enough for gamers only" and not for Amiga computer users.

But you can also cut it short at: "Amiga(D)OS by design chose to put some libraries in ROM and some on floppy disk, without ever providing installers. Meanwhile, the OS needs those files to operate, like for printing text. The OS therefore consists of what is in ROM and what comes on required accompanying disks, and the files on disk are considered a necessary extension for the OS to be operated by every user."

If a language is OS-friendly, it can't be punished by using system routines to print text in the default font. This is the conclusion that will be reached by a court if somehow rights owners should choose to sue you, and therefore you should without any hesitation put any and all Workbench files with your floppy disk release to make it work.

Anything else would make the OS itself ransomware (as stated previously). The OS (ROM+disks) has already been sold once.

Originally Posted by aNdy/AL/COS

@Photon...

I know that this thread was not originally to do with what I was asking, but I thought it was a parallel to what the original thread became, a discussion about the legality of certain libraries or other files being included on bootable disks 'released' by us small-time devs.

I apologise to you and 'madaxe' for taking the thread off course slightly, it was not my intention.

Just to be thorough, a few weeks ago I contacted Cloanto about the legality of including 'ECHO' on the release disk for my game and have heard absolutely nothing from them. Good job I found an alternative anyway...

It's highly topical, because if rights holders would in their own minds reach a different conclusion than from a court, they have just lost the rights they thought they had. This is for all devs, AND the rights holders.

[Thomas Richter]

Originally Posted by Photon

On most OSes, if an installer would overwrite an existing library or similar, it could affect and potentially wreck in principle all other programs installed on that OS. This has also in fact happened.

Then make it so that it does not overwrite anything. If it needs specific libraries, it is sufficient to place them into the same directory as the program itself and AmigaOs will pick them up from there. Ideally, there is no installation needed - just copy it wherever you want to have it, and it runs.

Originally Posted by Photon

Installation requires some form of permanent storage, and most Amiga models were sold without one.

It is 2023 now, and how many people *do not* have some form of permanent storage?

Originally Posted by Photon

No installation means among other things, that Amiga programs can run on a mobile phone. It is up to the difficulty of emulation there. It's normally very difficult to set up a permanent storage here; like some emus "barely good enough for gamers only" and not for Amiga computer users.

Wait, is the goal here to write some Apps for your smart phone or write a program for the Amiga? The Amiga is not a mobile phone, and if someone is sane or insane enough to install an emulator there, it is not the burden of the program author to enable installation there.

Originally Posted by Photon

But you can also cut it short at: "Amiga(D)OS by design chose to put some libraries in ROM and some on floppy disk, without ever providing installers.

Dare to look? There is a utlitiliy called "Installer", which (gasp!) is used for installing software.

Originally Posted by Photon

If a language is OS-friendly, it can't be punished by using system routines to print text in the default font.

Languages are neither os-friendly nor unfriendly. Programs are. I have no problem writing Os-friendly programs in assembly, and unfriendly programs in Basic.

Originally Posted by Photon

This is the conclusion that will be reached by a court if somehow rights owners should choose to sue you, and therefore you should without any hesitation put any and all Workbench files with your floppy disk release to make it work.

The court would not care on a particular language. Just whether you distribute copyrighted material. Just don't. Deliver your software such that it can be installed on an already setup system, and you do not need to distribute such material. Problem solved.

Originally Posted by Photon

Anything else would make the OS itself ransomware (as stated previously). The OS (ROM+disks) has already been sold once.

Anything else but what? Dependencies from the Os does not make the Os "ransomware" - that's silly. There is no need to deliver Os components as part of your own product because your customer already has them available at his end. Just make the program run from an existing installation and you are good.

Originally Posted by Photon

It's highly topical, because if rights holders would in their own minds reach a different conclusion than from a court, they have just lost the rights they thought they had. This is for all devs, AND the rights holders.

I beg your pardon, but I doubt that there was ever the right that you could take somebody else's work without permission and redistribute it. As a program author, package properly. "Here is my code, put it into a drawer of the workbench, click to run". That is the simplest thing to do. There is no need to distribute Os components along as the Os components are already present.