English Amiga Board


Go Back   English Amiga Board > Main > Amiga scene

 
 
Thread Tools
Old 06 June 2021, 03:22   #1281
Warty
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Minneapolis, USA
Posts: 234
Reaction back-port to 3.1.4/etc?

Amiga on the Lake says my CD-ROM is coming on Monday, so excited about that! I downloaded the NDK just now, and am starting to look through it, but of course without an actual OS to compile for, it's a very theoretical exercise. But one question I did have: if we convert our apps to Reaction, they won't work on systems without Reaction. As I understand it, Hyperion actually bought the rights to Reaction. Any chance that Reaction can be made available to non-3.2 systems, so that our apps work on older systems?

Maybe it's dependent on something in the KS, or another updated library, which would make it a no go from a technical point of view.
Warty is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 03:42   #1282
Minuous
Coder/webmaster/gamer
Minuous's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Canberra/Australia
Posts: 2,325
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warty View Post
Any chance that Reaction can be made available to non-3.2 systems, so that our apps work on older systems?
ReAction has been part of the OS for over 20 years now, since OS3.5.
Minuous is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 04:08   #1283
boemann
AmigaOS 3.2 Developer

 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Frederiksberg
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Warty View Post
Amiga on the Lake says my CD-ROM is coming on Monday, so excited about that! I downloaded the NDK just now, and am starting to look through it, but of course without an actual OS to compile for, it's a very theoretical exercise. But one question I did have: if we convert our apps to Reaction, they won't work on systems without Reaction. As I understand it, Hyperion actually bought the rights to Reaction. Any chance that Reaction can be made available to non-3.2 systems, so that our apps work on older systems?

Maybe it's dependent on something in the KS, or another updated library, which would make it a no go from a technical point of view.
It is dependent on the KS now yes for several important fixes.
boemann is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 06:12   #1284
Michael
A1260T/PPC/BV/SCSI/NET

Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Moscow / Russia
Posts: 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanujan View Post
- they are limited to fixed-width fonts, and they are using the same one as the console window; I don't know any single font that would look nice both within console (or ASCII editor) and within normal application window - the OS 3.9 prefs fixed this

- they use old-style gadgets
You can set the font used for the shell windows separately in shell prefs.
So nothing is stopping you from having different fixed width system font for prefs and cons, textedit can have it's own font too.

You can do some face lifts with VisualPrefs if you fancy other looks.

Only thing you will miss is skinning. Adding proportional font support to a gui that relies on text layout is not that simple and would have required a complete overhaul. But don't worry, there are plans to improve that, you can't have everything immediately with limited resources.
Michael is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 06:16   #1285
Michael
A1260T/PPC/BV/SCSI/NET

Michael's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Moscow / Russia
Posts: 754
Quote:
Originally Posted by Minuous View Post
ReAction has been part of the OS for over 20 years now, since OS3.5.
And if you do not need any modern features, you can even go back to ClassActs that are freely available, so nothing stops the users from using applications with ReAction GUI. But if you use new features, you probably also need 3.2, so interested users should upgrade from stock 3.1. It's the same for other gui toolkits.
Michael is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 10:47   #1286
Romanujan
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Szczecin/Poland
Posts: 392
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
You can set the font used for the shell windows separately in shell prefs.
So nothing is stopping you from having different fixed width system font for prefs and cons, textedit can have it's own font too.
I can use the SetFont command for the shell, but it seems the TextEdit can only switch between monospace / proportional font, I can't find a way to specify concrete font for the TextEdit.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael View Post
Adding proportional font support to a gui that relies on text layout is not that simple and would have required a complete overhaul. But don't worry, there are plans to improve that, you can't have everything immediately with limited resources.
Of course, I fully understand this is not something that could be done in one evening.
Romanujan is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 16:59   #1287
bubbob42
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Germany
Posts: 529
Quote:
Originally Posted by Romanujan View Post
Coincidence. They typically share the same problems:
- they all lack the window close gadget, which is irritating
That's intentional. A close gadget would duplicate the function of the cancel-buttonsgadget and an inexperienced user (yes, those exist and just discover Workbench after having played only games in their youth) wouldn't now whether it meant use (like on other OS where every change is instant) or cancel.

Quote:
- they are limited to fixed-width fonts, and they are using the same one as the console window; I don't know any single font that would look nice both within console (or ASCII editor) and within normal application window - the OS 3.9 prefs fixed this
I agree; this is might be a todo. They're currently using system font.

Quote:
- many of them lack any graphics, or the graphics is very simplified (Input, Locale)
Yes, there's was no way to display graphics in GadTools-Listviews this time. A colorful map and flags for Locale were considered as being cosmetic, too.

What I personally miss are improved previews for font and palette, like you mentioned.
bubbob42 is offline  
Old 06 June 2021, 23:47   #1288
QkiZ
Registered User

QkiZ's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: Poland
Posts: 30
I just found bug in 3.2. I updated system from 3.1.4.1 and when I'm trying to run TextEdit it says that requires version 47 of window.class. But i have that version installed on system.
Another thing: preview window of Reaction preferences is broken, when I'm changing some settings whole window become empty.
----EDIT:
I found some old window.class in LIBS: dir. After delete TextEdit starts working.

Last edited by QkiZ; 06 June 2021 at 23:58.
QkiZ is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 02:00   #1289
ExiE
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: T/C
Posts: 171
Just a curious question, if it hasn't been answered yet. Why was version 3.2 chosen and what are the plans for the numbering of next versions (in relation to AmigaOS 3.5 and 3.9)?
ExiE is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 02:24   #1290
gulliver
BoingBagged

gulliver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The South of nowhere
Age: 43
Posts: 2,337
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExiE View Post
Just a curious question, if it hasn't been answered yet. Why was version 3.2 chosen and what are the plans for the numbering of next versions (in relation to AmigaOS 3.5 and 3.9)?
AmigaOS versioning is as complex as someone else has label it here "it is like Star Wars movies".
gulliver is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 04:05   #1291
wiser3
Registered User

 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Canada
Posts: 63
I think the next Amiga OS version should be 5. I realized the difference between 3.2 and 5 isn't as huge as the number suggests. However, 5 would clearly indicate that it's better then 3.9 and different then 4/4.1.
wiser3 is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 04:48   #1292
Matt_H
Registered User
Matt_H's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Boston, MA
Posts: 545
Quote:
Originally Posted by wiser3 View Post
I think the next Amiga OS version should be 5. I realized the difference between 3.2 and 5 isn't as huge as the number suggests. However, 5 would clearly indicate that it's better then 3.9 and different then 4/4.1.
Release 5 would imply that it includes everything from 4.x and then some, which it (probably?) won’t. And that it would include multiple major overhauls throughout the system, but I get the impression the focus for the development roadmap is on steady, incremental improvements for the time being.

But I agree that some revised numbering would be helpful. I think we now find ourselves in a MacOSX-like situation, where major releases were still under the 10.x brand. So in our case my recommendation would be to skip ahead to 3.10. It’s still AmigaOS3, but it’d be very clear that we’re well beyond 3.9.
Matt_H is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 07:00   #1293
Predseda
Puttymoon inhabitant
Predseda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: The City of Townsville
Age: 43
Posts: 6,612
Send a message via ICQ to Predseda
Next version will be Vista. Or maybe from preventing legal infrigments, Waste?
Predseda is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 08:30   #1294
E-Penguin
Banana

E-Penguin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Darmstadt
Posts: 1,062
IMHO should have kept going after 3.1.4 - > 3.1.5 - > 3.1.6...

as it's based on the 3.1 code line.

Perhaps more confusing, what will happen after things reach V49, as V50 is AOS 4.

It's a good problem to have.
E-Penguin is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 08:43   #1295
captain_zzap
Registered User

 
Join Date: Feb 2016
Location: Space
Posts: 27
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Penguin View Post
IMHO should have kept going after 3.1.4 - > 3.1.5 - > 3.1.6...

as it's based on the 3.1 code line.
I heard, it’s actually using quite some code from OS4.
captain_zzap is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 11:18   #1296
Olaf Barthel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Lehrte, Germany
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by gulliver View Post
AmigaOS versioning is as complex as someone else has label it here "it is like Star Wars movies".
To dispel any rumours, no producers, directors, screenwriters or script doctors involved in the making of the "Star Wars" franchise have contributed to AmigaOS 3.1.4, 3.1.4.1 or 3.2.

We didn't ask around and nobody applied. There could be a reason for that beyond the reaction to the last three movies made, but this is just me speculating.
Olaf Barthel is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 11:22   #1297
Olaf Barthel
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Lehrte, Germany
Posts: 296
Quote:
Originally Posted by E-Penguin View Post
IMHO should have kept going after 3.1.4 - > 3.1.5 - > 3.1.6...

as it's based on the 3.1 code line.
Irrational numbers are involved, too. Which would have meant 3.1.4 -> 3.1.4.1 -> 3.1.4.1.5, etc. This turned out to be impractical for a surprising number of reasons. One of which likely includes that combining mathematics with humour or even irony is very challenging even at the best of times.

Quote:
Perhaps more confusing, what will happen after things reach V49, as V50 is AOS 4.

It's a good problem to have.
We already have an idea or two how to approach the problem when it arrives
Olaf Barthel is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 13:24   #1298
ExiE
Registered User

 
Join Date: Apr 2016
Location: T/C
Posts: 171
It looks like the real answer will remain hidden from me. Maybe it is a secret...
ExiE is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 14:06   #1299
boemann
AmigaOS 3.2 Developer

 
Join Date: Mar 2020
Location: Frederiksberg
Posts: 174
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExiE View Post
It looks like the real answer will remain hidden from me. Maybe it is a secret...
Not that secret. As to why: I think we just wanted to have enough time before having to deal with clashing with the 4.0 numbers.
The next couple of major releases will most likely be 3.3 and 3.4. We will probably skip 3.5 and 3.9 to avoid confusion for the same reason we don't want to conflict with 4.0. In any case there are probably as many reasons as there were people discussing.

The real version numbers (the 3.2 is just a PR number) are much more important as programs rely on these numbers to do the right thing. We are now at 47.

We can not go higher than 49 ever. We have resigned ourselves to the fact than going higher will end up in problems. So we are contemplating other mechanisms to allow us to change the API going forward. But none that we have settled on and much less experimented with so it would be premature to say more.
boemann is offline  
Old 07 June 2021, 15:19   #1300
Warty
Registered User

 
Join Date: Aug 2018
Location: Minneapolis, USA
Posts: 234
Quote:
Originally Posted by boemann View Post
We can not go higher than 49 ever.
Is it like crossing the streams? What happens? End of the world type stuff? And who is responsible for this V49(non)K problem?

In all seriousness, where will it go wrong with a '50'? Some kind of backwards compatibility thing?
Warty is offline  
 


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
AmigaOS 3.1.x v 3.9 steve_mynott New to Emulation or Amiga scene 35 19 April 2020 06:23
AmigaOS 3.9 PoLoMoTo support.WinUAE 8 27 August 2011 18:06
AmigaOS 3.5 or 3.9 maddoc666 support.Apps 12 22 February 2010 08:02
AmigaOS koncool request.Apps 6 04 June 2003 17:45
AmigaOS XL sturme New to Emulation or Amiga scene 4 15 January 2002 02:13

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 10:19.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Page generated in 0.12235 seconds with 14 queries