From: Henry Cross <hcr...@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: iBCS & Linux
Date: 1996/08/30
Message-ID: <3227455A.125E0DD0@ix.netcom.com>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 177541605
content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
organization: Netcom
x-netcom-date: Fri Aug 30 12:45:57 PM PDT 1996
mime-version: 1.0
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.apps
x-mailer: Mozilla 2.0 (X11; I; Linux 2.0.12 i586)
Does a program written for another variant of UNIX on the Intel platform have
to also be designed to be compatible with iBCS in order to run on Linux?
In other words must you code specifically for iBCS in order to be able to take
advantage of the cross-platform (OS-wise) capability or is this ability simply
inherent to iBCS and the coders need not take it into consideration.
TIA,
--
H.Cross
hcr...@ix.netcom.com
=============================================================================
Work: | OS/2 - Awesome multi-tasking capabilities.
Play: | DOS and it's graphical menu system. (Windows)
Learn: | U of NIX (LINUX rocks!)
=============================================================================
From: Mike Jagdis <ja...@purplet.demon.co.uk>
Subject: iBCS & Linux
Date: 1996/09/03
Message-ID: <1014.322E01CA@purplet.demon.co.uk>#1/1
X-Deja-AN: 178509246
x-mail2news-path: purplet.demon.co.uk
x-nntp-posting-host: purplet.demon.co.uk
sender: "newsout1.26" <ufg...@purplet.demon.co.uk>
organization: FidoNet node 2:252/305 - The Purple Tentacle, Reading
newsgroups: comp.os.linux.development.apps
* In message <3227455A.125E0...@ix.netcom.com>, Henry Cross said:
HC> Does a program written for another variant of UNIX on the
HC> Intel platform have
HC> to also be designed to be compatible with iBCS in order to
HC> run on Linux?
HC> In other words must you code specifically for iBCS in order
HC> to be able to take
HC> advantage of the cross-platform (OS-wise) capability or is
HC> this ability simply
HC> inherent to iBCS and the coders need not take it into
HC> consideration.
No. The iBCS emultor is badly misnamed. Firstly it isn't doesn't so much
emulate another system as translate a few things backwards and forwards
where necessary. Secondly it never set out to actually implement iBCS.
What it *does* do is to implement the basic frameworks of SVR3 and SVR4
along with the major (and known) variations introduced along the way.
Recognition of the system binaries were compiled on is transparent so there
is nothing to do except run them. You can run binaries from Wyse V/386, SCO,
Unixware and Interactive side by side and at the same time and forget you
are even doing it.
There are some things missing such as the full SecureWare security
subsystem used by SCO and the kernel threads from Unixware. These aren't
particularly easy to do - but no one seems to have needed them yet :-).
Mike