Re: Fwd: Status and future of 3rd party ABI compatibility layer

[Andrew Doran <ad%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Tue, Mar 01, 2011 at 12:07:19PM +0200, Antti Kantee wrote:
> On Tue Mar 01 2011 at 09:55:38 +0000, Andrew Doran wrote:
> > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:25:07AM -0500, Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
> > 
> > > On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 11:13:36AM +0200, haad wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > With solaris.kmod we are compatible with solaris kernel, (we should
> > > > be able to load solaris kernel modules).
> > > 
> > > Have you actually tried this?  I am pretty sure it would not work.
> > > 
> > > It appears to me that solaris.kmod includes shims that provide some
> > > Solaris kernel interfaces at the *source* level in NetBSD, which
> > > certainly makes it easier to port kernel code from Solaris but does
> > > not (as far as I can tell) give us binary compatibility.
> > 
> > Adam may have meant source level compat, it definitely does provide some
> > level of that. Of course no binary compat as you say.
> 
> If Solaris has a "module-compatible" kernel ABI it's most likely possible
> to be binary compatible considering we're source-compatible already
> (cf. rump ABI compatibility with the kernel).  Of course it doesn't
> happen accidentally and there's some amount of work involved.  But if
> someone finds a use case for it, why not?

As you volunteering to maintain that, so?  Good idea, yeah why not.  :-)