Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386,comp.xenix.misc,comp.os.linux
From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Xenix (tm) emulation for Linux almost works :-)
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Thu, 6 Aug 1992 05:35:53 GMT
I was recently hired to write a Xenix simulation program that would
run under Linux. The program will be under the GNU license once complete.
I currently have it to the point where it can run sh and SCO pro (spread
sheet) reasonably well.
Fortunitly the 386 allows this program to run as a user process with
only minor changes to the kernel (avoids excesive kernel clutter).
I think this same approach could be used for other compatibility software
which would allow linux to run virtually anything without an insanely
large kernel.
Any one want to write an MS Windows simulator :-)
--
>>Unix/C Contract worker available 5 years C/unix work experience<< ______
Available for Telecommuting/Travel and contracts on the T Line \ /
in the Boston MA area. Send me e-mail for a copy of my Resume. \ /
-- VWIS 508-793-9568 (2400 baud), Linux support BBS.-- \/
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: lfoard@Turing.ORG (Lawrence C. Foard)
Subject: Re: Xenix (tm) emulation for Linux
Organization: The Turing Project, Charlottesville Virginia.
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1992 22:35:52 GMT
In article < A34181@HB.maus.de> Michael_Kraehe@hb.maus.de (Michael Kraehe) writes:
> > I was recently hired to write a Xenix simulation program that would
> > run under Linux. The program will be under the GNU license once complete.
>Does that mean, that you can run OMF's in 8086-Compat-Mode, or can you
>also run OMF's in 286 and 386 mode ?
>
>I'am very interestet, because I need the OLD&UGLY MS-CC, for
>DOS-Cross-Develpment. So I've Xenix on the same Disk as Linux :-(
At this point it will only handle the 386 code. I assume that there
is an entirely different set of system calls for the 16 bit code.
The emulator assumes that all code and data will reside in the same
segment which seems to be true of all the 386 programs I've tried.
Does anyone know anything about the SysV system calls? How close is
system V on the 386 to Xenix?
--
>>Unix/C Contract worker available 5 years C/unix work experience<< ______
Available for Telecommuting/Travel and contracts on the T Line \ /
in the Boston MA area. Send me e-mail for a copy of my Resume. \ /
-- VWIS 508-793-9568 (2400 baud), Linux support BBS.-- \/
From: usenet@novell.com (The Netnews Manager)
Subject: Re: Xenix (tm) emulation for Linux almost works : -)
Date: 20 Aug 92 19:33:00 GMT
I just grabbed the SLS package and installed it last night... very impressive.
To everyone involved : GREAT JOB! I managed to get X running on my
paradise IIs but I have a big monitor attached to an ATI ultra which I would
really like to use instead. I read somewhere that there is a (BETA/ALPHA)
driver for the Ultra... if so where can I grab it from.
From: dvogt@novell.com (David Vogt)
Path: dvogt
Another question. I'm not too clear as to where the SLS (0.96c I think)
fits in with 0.97 (shared libs, X vs gcc.2.2.2d, etc). I'd really like to
contribute to Linux but I'm fairly new to unix so I want to get to the point
where I can build the kernel and update to the latest and greatest before I
get started on a project. Thanks in advance!
Dave
dvogt@novell.com
Generic Disclaimer : I speak only for myself
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux
From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald)
Subject: Re: Xenix (tm) emulation for Linux almost works : -)
Nntp-Posting-Host: sanjuan.uvic.ca
Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria B.C. CANADA
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 92 22:21:53 GMT
In article < 1992Aug20.193300.264@novell.com> usenet@novell.com (The Netnews Manager)
writes:
>I just grabbed the SLS package and installed it last night... very impressive.
....
>
>Another question. I'm not too clear as to where the SLS (0.96c I think)
>fits in with 0.97 (shared libs, X vs gcc.2.2.2d, etc). I'd really like to
>contribute to Linux but I'm fairly new to unix so I want to get to the point
>where I can build the kernel and update to the latest and greatest before I
>get started on a project. Thanks in advance!
>
SLS is a cross section of Linux frozen at about .96c. It looks like SLS
will not move to .97, because Linus announced .98 will have > 64 Meg memory
per process, which means a new GCC will have be be release, X11 whith its
shared libs will have to be rebuilt, etc, etc. In other words, .97 may
be very short lived. But that isn't to bad, considering it isn't to
much more featureful than .96c. But don't expect SLS .98 for quite
some time (2 months?). It takes a long time to compile all the pieces,
and I would like to crystalize the file permissions and locations
to widely acceptable values.
>Dave
>dvogt@novell.com
>
>
>Generic Disclaimer : I speak only for myself
pmacdona@sanjuan.uvic.ca