We'll all know all coders are not equal on this scene, sharing those sources would brings some great improvement and freedom to the scene !
Full Version: Kernel SOURCES Fully Available !
and only 10 ppl know what that mean....
You started this with msdash source aswell, what are you going on about?
If only 10 people know what you mean what are you doing posting it on a public forum?
People may have their own code and reversed a lot of the ms kernel but i doubt they have got hold of the origional source.
They shouldnt release their own code, they shouldnt release reversed code and if they did have it they shouldnt release copyrighted ms code. There isnt much need for it, anyone good enough to code kernels dont need that much help.
If only 10 people know what you mean what are you doing posting it on a public forum?
People may have their own code and reversed a lot of the ms kernel but i doubt they have got hold of the origional source.
They shouldnt release their own code, they shouldnt release reversed code and if they did have it they shouldnt release copyrighted ms code. There isnt much need for it, anyone good enough to code kernels dont need that much help.
Well all bios except the cromwell are based on m$ kernel so based on copyrighted ms code.....
You don't wanna see samba support in bios ? or kb working in game ?
And yes few ppl have the full kernel srcs from M$
You don't wanna see samba support in bios ? or kb working in game ?
And yes few ppl have the full kernel srcs from M$
If the sources are available to a few in the 'underground' - then by all means, they should be made available to developers. At the very least made available to BIOS, dashboard and similar utility app developers.
This relates to the same issue I have with the developers of Evo-X, who have shared only a small amount of the info they are privvy to that isn't available in the XDKs and other published sources.
I also think that if these sources do exist, they should be handled carefully, too... they should not be merely dumped on the net, but made available to those with a need-to-know on an educational basis.
This relates to the same issue I have with the developers of Evo-X, who have shared only a small amount of the info they are privvy to that isn't available in the XDKs and other published sources.
I also think that if these sources do exist, they should be handled carefully, too... they should not be merely dumped on the net, but made available to those with a need-to-know on an educational basis.
amen to that, he right.
crazy that the source code become more & more available to people...
but i find it a good idea...hope it will be public one day...
but i find it a good idea...hope it will be public one day...
This is probably crazy talk 
, but what about the possibility of starting a opensource bios clone project?
Or even better(?), use a stripped down linux kernel and somehow create bindings to the ms xbox kernel calls..
I probably need to wake up soon. .
, but what about the possibility of starting a opensource bios clone project?Or even better(?), use a stripped down linux kernel and somehow create bindings to the ms xbox kernel calls..
I probably need to wake up soon. .
| QUOTE (BenJeremy @ Jan 5 2004, 03:41 PM) |
| If the sources are available to a few in the 'underground' - then by all means, they should be made available to developers. At the very least made available to BIOS, dashboard and similar utility app developers. This relates to the same issue I have with the developers of Evo-X, who have shared only a small amount of the info they are privvy to that isn't available in the XDKs and other published sources. I also think that if these sources do exist, they should be handled carefully, too... they should not be merely dumped on the net, but made available to those with a need-to-know on an educational basis. |
I agree
uh oh what did I start 
Absoluteley he shouldnt
Absoluteley he shouldnt
There is a poll option missing... "No, cause it's a bad idea".
I'd vote for that one.
This topic is obviously illegal anyway, and should be removed from the forums.
I'd vote for that one.
This topic is obviously illegal anyway, and should be removed from the forums.
can i just ask, when you say kernal source you mean in C right? you can get the extract the xbox kernal from the xdk in asm, i know as ive got a copy sitting on my desktop. Im fairly certain i got the informatiion on what to do from a forum, the file is roughly 12mb (65.000 odd pages of assembler)
Please if im in anyway mistaken please dont flame me,
Please if im in anyway mistaken please dont flame me,
| QUOTE (clogicgmather @ Feb 2 2004, 06:35 PM) |
| can i just ask, when you say kernal source you mean in C right? you can get the extract the xbox kernal from the xdk in asm, i know as ive got a copy sitting on my desktop. Im fairly certain i got the informatiion on what to do from a forum, the file is roughly 12mb (65.000 odd pages of assembler) Please if im in anyway mistaken please dont flame me, |
c/c++, yes.
jokk:
Weren't you the one who posted numerous times in the old 'When is Surreal 64 coming out' thread telling Iriez to share the sources?
Didn't he say that a) he didn't have them and b ) if he did he wouldn't share them because people such as yourself were putting high attention on him having and potentially releasing MS source code?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that he has them, but let's think about this. MS is a big BIG company. It's owner is a very rich man. With money comes power. As such, they DO have the ability to track people down over the internet and completley rape them in court. Now where's the benefit for Iriez to release the sources? Sure it may help the scene (well, not as much as 2 years ago), however I don't think it wise to release MS owned source code, especially when so much attention is being put on who specifically is releasing it.
C'mon, show some sense. And stop instigating will ya.
Morien
Weren't you the one who posted numerous times in the old 'When is Surreal 64 coming out' thread telling Iriez to share the sources?
Didn't he say that a) he didn't have them and b ) if he did he wouldn't share them because people such as yourself were putting high attention on him having and potentially releasing MS source code?
I'll give you the benefit of the doubt that he has them, but let's think about this. MS is a big BIG company. It's owner is a very rich man. With money comes power. As such, they DO have the ability to track people down over the internet and completley rape them in court. Now where's the benefit for Iriez to release the sources? Sure it may help the scene (well, not as much as 2 years ago), however I don't think it wise to release MS owned source code, especially when so much attention is being put on who specifically is releasing it.
C'mon, show some sense. And stop instigating will ya.
Morien
IMHO it would be nice if someone could share the sources. But I don't think that
Iriez has them(he was just the one who said that Xecuter should share the sources).
It would be cool if everyone could have their own bioses(like MaTiAz 5233.04 no-IGR).
Iriez has them(he was just the one who said that Xecuter should share the sources).
It would be cool if everyone could have their own bioses(like MaTiAz 5233.04 no-IGR).
| QUOTE (BenJeremy @ Jan 5 2004, 02:41 PM) |
| I also think that if these sources do exist, they should be handled carefully, too... they should not be merely dumped on the net, but made available to those with a need-to-know on an educational basis. |
Who would be the judge of who had the right to have them and who doesn't... kernel sources like this can't be contained. Once free to the public (or handled carefully), someone will leak and spread them like wildfire...
They are in the right hands. He that has them deserves the right to keep them to himself (or themselves). If you want them so bad, get them yourself... the same way he did... (I'm talking to jokk here, not BJ; I believe they are talking about two different sources)
Anyone who really has much ability to do much with the kernel source should have a strong understanding in ix86 asm already, so they can just dump from the xdk and work from there.
If the c code is reverse-engineered by a group, they don't need to release it to the world, the fact that you have bioses based off it you should be thankful enough.
If they do, that'd be cool, but if they don't, well, there isn't much you can do but do the same work they did and gain far more insight into it than you would by merely using their code.
In the end it is the same as non-gpl games/programs, you should enjoy the fact that the authors took the time and released it for you to also use, not demand more from them.
If the c code is reverse-engineered by a group, they don't need to release it to the world, the fact that you have bioses based off it you should be thankful enough.
If they do, that'd be cool, but if they don't, well, there isn't much you can do but do the same work they did and gain far more insight into it than you would by merely using their code.
In the end it is the same as non-gpl games/programs, you should enjoy the fact that the authors took the time and released it for you to also use, not demand more from them.
Regardless of the issue at hand, this is just one more example of jokk trying to bring his personal issues with Iriez into the public eye.
jokk, I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say we're sick of you broadcasting your hissy fits. Grow up and talk to Iriez yourself if you have a problem with him.
Closed, poll deleted.
jokk, I'm sure I speak for everyone here when I say we're sick of you broadcasting your hissy fits. Grow up and talk to Iriez yourself if you have a problem with him.
Closed, poll deleted.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.