From owner-freebsd-hackers Mon Jun 5 23:55:42 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from gizmo.internode.com.au (gizmo.internode.com.au [192.83.231.115]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5BE3337B9E2 for ; Mon, 5 Jun 2000 23:55:38 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from newton@gizmo.internode.com.au) Received: (from newton@localhost) by gizmo.internode.com.au (8.9.3/8.9.3) id QAA83277; Tue, 6 Jun 2000 16:24:53 +0930 (CST) (envelope-from newton) Date: Tue, 6 Jun 2000 16:24:53 +0930 From: Mark Newton To: Dan Nelson Cc: Matthew Emmerton , freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: iBCS status? Message-ID: <20000606162453.B83108@internode.com.au> References: <000a01bfcf7a$cc810330$1200a8c0@matt> <20000606152128.B82736@internode.com.au> <20000606012552.A1515@dan.emsphone.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <20000606012552.A1515@dan.emsphone.com> X-PGP-Key: http://www.on.net/~newton/pgpkey.txt Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 01:25:53AM -0500, Dan Nelson wrote: > In the last episode (Jun 06), Mark Newton said: > > On Tue, Jun 06, 2000 at 01:48:10AM -0400, Matthew Emmerton wrote: > > > > > I was recently playing around with iBCS support in FreeBSD > > > 3.4/4.0, and noticed that there hasn't been much done since 96/97. > > > From what I can see now, FreeBSD can't run SCO OpenServer 5.0 ELF > > > binaries, which is a feature I need desperately -- Linux has this > > > functionality. If anyone is working on iBCS, let me know, > > > otherwise I'll start hacking away at the the emulation code to > > > allow SCO OSR5 ELF stuff. > > > > SCO OpenServer doesn't use iBCS2, it's an SysVR4 ELF system. FreeBSD > > has notional support for it under the svr4 emulator in 4.x and > > -current, but hardly any testing has been done with SCO (I've been > > using Solaris binaries and libraries). > > I can say it pretty much doesn't work at all on SCO. I'm not at all surprised :-) I've had some reports from people who say they've had limited success, but since I don't have any SCO bits here I haven't been running any SCO software. > There is > apparently quite a difference between Solaris and SCO SVR4; the first > thing I had to do was change the lseek() syscall to use 32-bit offsets > instead of 64-bit, for example. Interesting - Solaris has two lseek syscalls, notionally "lseek" and "lseek64". If SCO only has one, which is a 64 bit variant, could you perhaps let me know what its syscall number is? - mark -- Mark Newton Email: newton@internode.com.au (W) Network Engineer Email: newton@atdot.dotat.org (H) Internode Systems Pty Ltd Desk: +61-8-82232999 "Network Man" - Anagram of "Mark Newton" Mobile: +61-416-202-223 To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message