*BSD News Article 21267


Return to BSD News archive

Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu!news.kei.com!news.byu.edu!cwis.isu.edu!fcom.cc.utah.edu!cs.weber.edu!terry
From: terry@cs.weber.edu (A Wizard of Earth C)
Subject: Re: NetBSD+FreeBSD merge urged!
Message-ID: <1993Sep21.201546.11569@fcom.cc.utah.edu>
Sender: news@fcom.cc.utah.edu
Organization: Weber State University, Ogden, UT
References: <1993Sep18.204206.29629@diana.ocunix.on.ca> <CDn8xn.33q@sztaki.hu>
Date: Tue, 21 Sep 93 20:15:46 GMT
Lines: 59

In article <CDn8xn.33q@sztaki.hu> pink@fsz.bme.hu writes:
>I remember somebody (Terry Lambert?) mentioned a couple of months ago that 
>he has SCO emulation running, but can't release the code, cause it has
>some not public stuff in it. Would be great!!! (correct me if i'm wrong)

Before I get deluged with mail, a preemptive strike (sorry if this is terse,
but I have been hit up a lot on these things):

o	Yes, I can run SCO Xenix 286 binaries (some ioctl()'s don't work).
o	Yes, I can run SCO Xenix 386 binaries.
o	Yes, I can run SCO UNIX, ISC UNIX, Microport, Cubix, and Altos
	binaries for SVR3 derivitive UNIX.
o	Yes, I can run *statically linked* SVR4 binaries.
o	Yes, I can run *statically linked* Linux binaries.
o	Yes, I have a real streams (some problems with priority banding) that
	can run the Lachman TCP/IP code and the sample streams code in the
	SVR4 docs.
o	Yes, I have real shared libraries not derived from Sun code.
o	Yes, I have a user space threads implementation which is source
	compatable with Sun's LWP.
o	Yes, my console is Unicode and can handle Japanese, Russian, Korean,
	etc. with only data set changes.
o	Yes, my filesystem is localizable so that you can rename well known
	files like "/etc" or "/etc/passwd" to the non-English equivalents
	and programs like "passwd" can still find them.
o	Yes, my VM has been fixed to eliminate ETXTBSY and all the failure
	cases therein (related to NFS, etc).
o	Yes, I have a stackable attributed filesystem with data compression
	built in on a per file block basis.
o	Yes, I have install disks that don't care about translated drive
	geometries and *just work* with DOS.
o	Yes, I have a DOS FS that can mount extended partitions and doesn't
	need changes to the disklabel to find DOS (it reads the partition
	table).
o	Yes, my serial ports work correctly with flow control.

NO, I CAN NOT GIVE OUT CODE WITHOUT MY EMPLOYERS PERMISSION.
NO, MY EMPLOYER WOULD NOT LOOK KINDLY ON PEOPLE LOBBYING FOR PERMISSION.
NO, I DON'T KNOW WHEN OR IF PERMISSION WILL BE FORTHCOMING.
NO, I DON'T WANT A BUNCH OF MAIL ASKING ME TO "JUST SNEAK A COPY".
NO, YOU DON'T FIND THIS AS FRUSTRATING AS I DO.

[ ... ]

>On the other hand i don't realy understand why on earth would one want to
>run DOS/Windows under NetBSD. I don't think that it would be so fast/compatible
>that serious work could be done under it. (Ready, steady, flame!) 

WABI on OS/2 is *faster* than Windows 3.1 by about 30% on the same hardware;
WABI on a box using X for the libs will allow you to run your windows apps
on X terminals on the same screen with UNIX apps, and if DDE is implemented
correctly, cut and paste between Windows apps and X apps.


					Terry Lambert
					terry@icarus.weber.edu
---
Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present
or previous employers.