Subject: Re: emul compat pages?
To: Todd Vierling <tv@wasabisystems.com>
From: Andrew Brown <atatat@atatdot.net>
List: netbsd-advocacy
Date: 09/05/2000 23:15:21
>: i think they do. or they pretend to, at least. thats why one needs
>: compat_ibcs2 in a config file for a kernel that will run bsdi
>: binaries. i used to run a bsdi binary for netscape in this manner.
>
>An *ELF* BSDI binary? The Netscape BSDI binaries (for BSD/OS 1.x and
>2.x) are a.out binaries, and do not need COMPAT_IBCS2. The system calls of
>BSD/OS 1.x and 2.x overlap NetBSD's, and simply COMPAT_43, COMPAT_12,
>COMPAT_13, and COMPAT_14 are adequate to provide the requisite support.
sorry, no. not an elf bsdi binary...and older one. i think it was a
2.1 binary of netscape 3.0 gold. so...if you don't need COMPAT_IBCS2,
i guess i've been confused for a while. sorry.
>BSD/OS 3.x and up binaries use, from what I'm told, their existing 1.x and
>2.x syscall list with a diverging set of syscalls from NetBSD after that
>point. I've been trying to get a BSD/OS eval CD to find out exactly what
>syscalls are what (in order to implement a full COMPAT_BSDOS). I may end up
>stealing from O*BSD. 8^)
:)
>: >Again, BSDI has nothing to do with IBCS2.
>:
>: except the emulation bit.
>
>Nope; BSDI binaries have nothing to do with IBCS2.
done. point ended.
--
|-----< "CODE WARRIOR" >-----|
codewarrior@daemon.org * "ah! i see you have the internet
twofsonet@graffiti.com (Andrew Brown) that goes *ping*!"
andrew@crossbar.com * "information is power -- share the wealth."