Date: Thu, 30 Jan 1997 19:25:39 -0800 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: jlemon@americantv.com (Jonathan Lemon) Cc: emulation@freebsd.org Subject: Re: doscmd vs ??? Message-ID: <15565.854681139@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 30 Jan 1997 15:24:10 CST." <Mutt.19970130152410.jlemon@right.PCS>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> I've wanted to get into the kernel source, and figured that the vm86 > emulation was as good of a place to start as any. So after a crash course > on Intel architecture, and some mucking with the vm86 patches, I have > doscmd running on a -current system. Running in this case being that I > can run all the executables in testbin, as well as booting Dos 5.0, and > running the instbsdi.exe binary, etc). Awesome! Let's get that stuff into -current! :-) > possibly adding in VME/VIF/VIP support, if I can figure out how. My question > is what advantage does doscmd have over linux's dosemu? IE: why not just > use dosemu, with the appropriate BSD kernel support? I'm not sure what technical advantages it has, if any, but I can say that there are good political reasons to work on doscmd. :-) BSDI donated doscmd to the other *BSD groups at my instigation, my argument being that since nobody in their "camp" was working on improving the code, perhaps a synergistic relationship could be formed by their donating the code to us and letting us fix it and send changes back. Unfortunately, this theory of mine has sort of not held up in practice since they donated the code and we ended up getting stuck and not sending _any_ improvements back. :-) [and some :-(] If dosemu is a better solution, and I wouldn't know, then I certainly wouldn't oppose it, but it sure would also be nice if we could make doscmd the kind of cooperative example I'd hoped it would be. So, perhaps not the technical answer you were looking for, but that's the political dimension. :-) Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?15565.854681139>