[openbeos] Re: Binary compatibility with Linux, and Be OS

  • From: François Revol <revol@xxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 07 Nov 2002 18:41:54 +0100 (CET)

En réponse à Fred K Ollinger <follinge@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>:

> > Yeah, I do realize that it is a different kernel space, but there
> still
> > but be to "trick" the program into thinking it is in the right
> memory
> > space. The problems that BeWINE ran into were a working select() and
> an
> > mmap(), but the new kernel will have them, so really the only other
> > problem would be to address the kernel space issues. Of course Im not
> a
> > developer, but from what I have seen that would probably take care
> of
> > alot of them, but seriously, the main problem with BeOS was the lack
> of
> > applications. This would take care of alot of them, even if you dont
> port
> > BeWINE on to BeOS, I think that a Linux VM would be better than
> nothing.
> > And it doesnt have to even be a part of OBOS, it can be 3rd party.
> 
> I think that this thinking is all wrong.
> 
> I do think that binary compatability is an awesome hack. NetBSD can
> run
> many different binaries all ready: linux, irix, etc. Great.
> 
> However, if one depends upon this, then one will stunt the growth of
> their
> own platform. I think that beos should think of the cutting edge apps.
> Apps that wouldn't even work right on other OSes. I run linux
> everyday,
> and I have all the apps that I need. I think that linux compatability
> is
> pointless b/c you can recompile everything anyway. The one hurdle is
False.
One year ago I'd use RealPlayer as an example... now it's not the best 
one.
Btw there are Linux apps we don't have the source (vmware ? :P)

> getting XFree up under beos and steps have been taken in that
> direction.
XFree or something better =)

> However, most people agree that recreating linux again is pointless.
True =)

François.

Other related posts:

  1. Home
  2. haiku
  3. Archive
  4. 11-2002