Request for Help: New Hobbes Testing

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello

We currently have a very nice Hobbes beta available for testing.

Here you can see the site:
- https://hobbes.os-2.in/

It is not public (for non OS/2 browser), so please register at:
-- https://hobbes.os-2.in/register

This new hobbes script allows different roles, and the Editor role is able to update the descriptions and improve the site in a very easy  way. I want to know if there are volunteers to help improving the descriptions of each file that is available.

Currently only the 14% of the archive files lack a description and I let me know if you want to help with it.

This hobbes is still on beta and we are not sure if that is going to be the final hosting, but the good news is that the script is very good and it is open to be improved. Thanks to Jason Page for all the work that made it possible.

We also have a mailing list if you want to join:
- https://warp.groups.io/g/HobbesArchive

Regards

[Alexco]

Hi Martin,

thanks a lot for providing a new Hobbes!
In the welcome text only Warp3 and upwards are mentioned. Is this intentional and does it mean old 2.x software will be removed from Hobbes?

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello Alexco, welcome to the forum.

In the welcome text only Warp3 and upwards are mentioned. Is this intentional and does it mean old 2.x software will be removed from Hobbes?

The text says that, but there is no plans to remove any thing from Hobbes just because it is from OS/2 1.x and 2.x. All the stuff that was on the NSMU Hobbes and HobbesArchive will remain there.

We discussed some time the policy to maintain only the latest version of a software on hobbes, with the exception of libraries, drivers and development tools. Some other exception may apply (like fixpacks) and we can discuss it.

Regards

[Neil Waldhauer]

Is this the final URL for the new Hobbes?

 https://hobbes.os-2.in/

[Martin Iturbide]

Is this the final URL for the new Hobbes?
https://hobbes.os-2.in/

Hello Neil.
No, it is not the final hosting yet. Jason is still in conversations with the ISP.

Just in case we haven't discuss in deep how the linking is going to work, if that is part of your question.

In general what I need now is more testing, feedback of the site and people that wants to became "Editors" to help with the sites descriptions.
Regards

[Alexco]

Hello Alexco, welcome to the forum.

The text says that, but there is no plans to remove any thing from Hobbes just because it is from OS/2 1.x and 2.x. All the stuff that was on the NSMU Hobbes and HobbesArchive will remain there.

We discussed some time the policy to maintain only the latest version of a software on hobbes, with the exception of libraries, drivers and development tools. Some other exception may apply (like fixpacks) and we can discuss it.

Hi Martin,
thanks and thanks for the clarification. If I may add some points:
- I see a lot of files having a description, only some files where it is missing (you already mentioned that)
- You have a "version" field, but it is mostly unused. But the version is most of the time already part of the title of the description. Can't this be filled in automatically in this case?
- Maybe it would be worth to add a "release date" (and fill in if a date is available) and change "date" to "upload date"?

- and perhaps for a later phase. I'm also in retro computing and some of the file bases have that (in my opinion) nifty feature that they group software by title. So, e.g. if you search for "Canon" in printer drivers, you would get a list with only the latest "Canon_BJ" and "Canon_CaPSL" releases. If you then click on one of these, you can see the older versions as well, below the latest version as a list. Something which is done very nicely here https://files.mega65.org/html/main.php.
- and please leave the current design untouched, it always feels like home visiting Hobbes 

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello

- I see a lot of files having a description, only some files where it is missing (you already mentioned that)

Yes, with some work these last two weeks I have reduced the missing descriptions/tittles to only 7.4%. There are a lot of icons and themes that it will take more time to complete.

I'm looking for more people to help me out. If you register I can give you "Editor" access so you can also help me improve the descriptions of the files.

- You have a "version" field, but it is mostly unused. But the version is most of the time already part of the title of the description. Can't this be filled in automatically in this case?

I will check with Jason if he has some idea about this.

- Maybe it would be worth to add a "release date" (and fill in if a date is available) and change "date" to "upload date"?

This is a good idea. I will check with Jason

- and perhaps for a later phase. I'm also in retro computing and some of the file bases have that (in my opinion) nifty feature that they group software by title. So, e.g. if you search for "Canon" in printer drivers, you would get a list with only the latest "Canon_BJ" and "Canon_CaPSL" releases. If you then click on one of these, you can see the older versions as well, below the latest version as a list. Something which is done very nicely here https://files.mega65.org/html/main.php.

I will check the sample and discuss this.

- and please leave the current design untouched, it always feels like home visiting Hobbes 

The idea is to leave the default design in that blue Hobbes style, but people that register


Thanks for the feedback.

[Martin Iturbide]

Hello

I would like to have some feedback from the people that upload new releases of OS/2 software about the new hobbes.

If Lars Erdmann, Mentore Siesto, Rich and other developers can register and let me know, I will give them "Editor" access.
Just give me some feedback.

Also, everybody is welcome to register to download the files and let me know any missing files.
- http://hobbes.os-2.in/register/invite/c0fdc5471e2fa709fa452a14

The snapshot I removed from HobbesArchive was from 2026-02-15, so some of the latest uploads may be missing.


Regards

[Doug Clark]

We discussed some time the policy to maintain only the latest version of a software on hobbes, with the exception of libraries, drivers and development tools. Some other exception may apply (like fixpacks) and we can discuss it.

My vote would be to maintain earlier versions of all software.  If the author wants only the latest version of his/her product, then hobbes should honor that.  But otherwise, save the old.  I have found too many examples of new stuff that does not work on my systems, or does not work as well as, previous versions.  Three specific examples: xFree86, VLC, and PmPrintf.  I do not mention these three to single them out as bad - all three are excellent products.  I just can't get them to run on my systems - even though I know they run on other people's machines.  So my choice is to use an earlier version that does run, or not run them at all.

If the version of the product is clearly indicated, either in a version field as suggested, or as part of the name, then I don't see the harm in keeping older stuff.  Other than the bits that might be wasted storing the stuff.

[Martin Iturbide]

My vote would be to maintain earlier versions of all software.  If the author wants only the latest version of his/her product, then hobbes should honor that.  But otherwise, save the old.  I have found too many examples of new stuff that does not work on my systems, or does not work as well as, previous versions.  Three specific examples: xFree86, VLC, and PmPrintf.  I do not mention these three to single them out as bad - all three are excellent products.  I just can't get them to run on my systems - even though I know they run on other people's machines.  So my choice is to use an earlier version that does run, or not run them at all.

If the version of the product is clearly indicated, either in a version field as suggested, or as part of the name, then I don't see the harm in keeping older stuff.  Other than the bits that might be wasted storing the stuff.

Hello Doug

I agree to maintain all the versions of old software, but not to be directly shown at Hobbes, because it looks bad in the page. But l will discuss with Jason to see if he had some ideas. I wanted to keep all the older versions on OS2Site, as a bigger repository, but I haven't finished the idea.

Regards

[Andi B.]

.... Three specific examples: xFree86, VLC, and PmPrintf. ....

May I ask which version of PmPrintf works and which does not anymore? I don't see any specific ticket here - https://sourceforge.net/p/pmprintf-os-2-debug-helper/tickets/ . But honestly don't remember current state exactly anymore. It's a while back when I played last time with it. From the tickets I opened myself I think there are some things not really finished the way I wanted to have it.

[Martin Iturbide]

.... Three specific examples: xFree86, VLC, and PmPrintf. ....

May I ask which version of PmPrintf works and which does not anymore? I don't see any specific ticket here - https://sourceforge.net/p/pmprintf-os-2-debug-helper/tickets/ . But honestly don't remember current state exactly anymore. It's a while back when I played last time with it. From the tickets I opened myself I think there are some things not really finished the way I wanted to have it.

Just notice that it can be exceptions of that rule of having only the latest version (driver, libraries, dev tools, firefox, etc).
Let me know and I will document it also on the description of the file.

Regards

[Sergey Posokhov]

"A file named "[File].zip" already exists in that category."

[Doug Clark]

Andi,

I did not mean to disparage anyone or any software and I am sorry if it came across that way.  I was rather trying to make the argument that having older versions of stuff can be very helpful in certain circumstances.

As for PmPrintf:  I am using version 2.60, I tried version 2.80 and had some issues with it, although it was long enough ago that I don't remember specifically what they were.  I did not turn in a ticket, but rather switched back to v 2.60 - my bad.  I will try again in a couple of days and turn in a ticket if I still find something.

I do use PmPrintf a lot. I would say an average log file size from PmPrintf "session" for the stuff I am doing now is 50K or more.

Thanks for your work on PmPrintf - among other things.

[Andi B.]

Hi Doug,
I'm not disparaged. Can you say like that? I mean I've to consult a dictionary as it's not a word I actively know. I'm not a native English speaker so maybe a lot of my talking may not sound the way I meant it. :-)

Regarding PmPrintf - I'm really interested in things I break when I work on that. I did a lot of fixing in PmPrintf as it didn't work the way I needed it. Usually I try to make my work as perfect as possible. But in case of PmPrintf I'm a bit unhappy. I know there are things waiting to be improved but I didn't find the time to finish them. The last version(s) work with the massive amount of messages my LCMD debug build produces. Even on my SMP machines. Older versions can't handle that good enough. But I remember I introduces an incompatibility with some own written pmprintf() functions (not the one included as source code example in the package). So if you use your own pmprintf() source code which does not transfer date in high memory, the receiving pmprintf.dll can't handle it. Unfortunately I couldn't finish that in a more user friendly way. But I never though before someone will use other code than the included samples until I started working on npdav (again). Moreover I was not aware someone else is even using that package anymore....

Just discovered the readme.txt here - https://sourceforge.net/p/pmprintf-os-2-debug-helper/code/ci/master/tree/Readme.txt - is a bit newer than the one at the main page.