Re:What have we lost? – Demo of exotic OSes (2021) [video]
by d_tr on Thursday August 25, 2022 @08:36PM
(#32601908)
A possible path would be something initially running on an SBC, like a RISC-V board or even an FPGA. People buy these boards to experiment and use for simple tasks. Something really interesting could gain a small initial following and slowly grow from there.
It does not have to be completely isolated. You can still have support for some common communication protocols and maybe some client software running on a mainstream system to do various things.
Re:What have we lost? – Demo of exotic OSes (2021) [video]
by galangalalgol on Friday August 26, 2022 @12:23AM
(#32603336)
I'd like to see a minimalist os that just runs multiple instances of wasm micro or maybe wasmer. It would only have to support the wasi. A scheduler, time support, a sockets implementation and a file system. Targeting a sbc makes a lot of sense for that.
Re:What have we lost? – Demo of exotic OSes (2021) [video]
by awannaphasch201 on Thursday September 01, 2022 @04:35PM
(#32682765)
Urbit.
Re:What have we lost? – Demo of exotic OSes (2021) [video]
by hammyhavoc on Friday August 26, 2022 @08:29AM
(#32606521)
IMO, the interesting future is RISC-V and FPGA. Potential is huge. Just needs better availability of devkits. Long lead times on much of it.
Re:What have we lost? – Demo of exotic OSes (2021) [video]
by anthk on Friday August 26, 2022 @06:22AM
(#32605485)
On plan9/9front, I'd love to port Nethack/Slashem with NPE:
https://git.sr.ht/~ft/npe/tree/master/item/include/npe
But not with a TTY UI. With libdraw:
Writing an OS from scratch is hard work, and without complying with pre-existing standards, the new OS won't be able to take advantage of existing software or communicate with computers running different operating systems, making it a non-starter for most users. Even supporting a wide range of hardware is very challenging, especially given the fact that many hardware devices lack documentation sufficient to write drivers, which results in challenging reverse-engineering projects or relying on the hardware manufacturer to create drivers for the new OS; this is a challenge even for Linux, which has the best driver support outside of Windows. Most people who want to experiment with new ideas for computer systems end up building on top of Linux since they can leverage Linux's existing hardware support and its implementation of a wide range of standards allowing interoperability.
I'm working on an experimental desktop computing project that ironically uses Plan 9 as its base platform since Plan 9's everything-is-a-file interface and its overall simplicity allows me to build my project with less effort than dealing with Linux/X11/Wayland/dbus/etc., but a big part of me is tempted to eventually write some 9P services to emulate enough of the underlying Plan 9 architecture to run my project on Linux and the BSDs in order to take advantage of these operating systems' better driver support.