Subject: Re: HELP!
To: Brian Hechinger <email@example.com>
From: Simon Burge <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Date: 06/25/2001 15:05:38
Brian Hechinger wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2001 at 01:34:28PM +1000, Simon Burge wrote:
> > Other than the files mentioned in compat_ultrix(8) I just copied the
> > contents of /usr/lib/cmplrs and the associated symlinks in /usr/bin
> > from an Ultrix backup.
> hmm, i don't have any copies of Ultrix around here. could i just pull something
> out of the PUPS archive and use that (and have it be useful)
Let's backstep a little.. The first message from Matt Green about Ultrix
binaries was about binaries running on MIPS-based DECstations compiled
with the Ultrix (really MIPS) C compiler. It was an idle comment thrown
in about binaries running on under emulation. It was not about alphas
> > There's DU and linux versions of the Compaq C compiler available. I've
> > looked a little at the linux version, but it causes MMU traps when run
> > on my pc164 :-( There wouldn't be an Ultrix version of the Compaq C
> > compiler available.
> so no chance of the Tru64 version of the Compaq C compiler working under
The Tru64 version of the Compaq C compiler should run under emulation
(modulo licencing or licence daemons - someone else mentioned that).
Note however that it will produce COFF (or ECOFF?) object files and
binaries which themselves will be required to run under emulation.
As for the way Tru64 licencing works - no idea. Ultrix used LMF
(License Management Facility) which was done with the getsysinfo() and
setsysinfo() syscalls. Whether or not OSF and later used the same
mechanism I dunno...
My goal with using the linux version of the Compaq C compiler (which
produces ELF objects) was to create native programs that didn't need to
run under a foreign OS emulation layer.
Simon Burge <email@example.com>
NetBSD CDs, Support and Service: http://www.wasabisystems.com/