From owner-freebsd-hackers Thu Jun 8 10:13:59 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from wall.polstra.com (rtrwan160.accessone.com [206.213.115.74]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C1EC637C07C for ; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:13:51 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) Received: from vashon.polstra.com (vashon.polstra.com [206.213.73.13]) by wall.polstra.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id KAA28756; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:13:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) From: John Polstra Received: (from jdp@localhost) by vashon.polstra.com (8.9.3/8.9.1) id KAA49356; Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:13:48 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jdp@polstra.com) Date: Thu, 8 Jun 2000 10:13:48 -0700 (PDT) Message-Id: <200006081713.KAA49356@vashon.polstra.com> To: dnelson@emsphone.com Subject: Re: SVR4 Emulation [was Re: iBCS status?] In-Reply-To: <20000608120525.A183@dan.emsphone.com> References: <000a01bfcf7a$cc810330$1200a8c0@matt> <20000607224010.A29029@dan.emsphone.com> <200006081617.JAA49089@vashon.polstra.com> <20000608120525.A183@dan.emsphone.com> Organization: Polstra & Co., Seattle, WA Cc: hackers@freebsd.org Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG In article <20000608120525.A183@dan.emsphone.com>, Dan Nelson wrote: > > Hmm. So does this mean that SVR4-compliant programs must be > dynamically-linked? Yes. The specification says that statically-linked programs are not compliant. > Is there any recommendations on how an OS should supply an SVR4 libc > to an SVR4 application when the OS itself may not be SVR4-compliant? Theoretically, you wouldn't need any kernel-level emulation at all if you provided the right libc. But of course it's not really SVR4 you want to emulate -- it's UnixWare or OpenServer or something else that has lots of extra interfaces which are outside the ABI specification. Overall I think it's easier to use the vendor's libraries and do the emulation at the kernel level, as we do now. > And this doesn't address any libraries other than libc, I suppose? Right. > Sounds like trying to emulate "SVR4" in itself isn't sufficient. We > can still call the kld svr4.ko, but it's really doing SCO/SolarisX86 > syscall emulation. Yep. John -- John Polstra jdp@polstra.com John D. Polstra & Co., Inc. Seattle, Washington USA "Disappointment is a good sign of basic intelligence." -- Chögyam Trungpa To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message