From owner-freebsd-hackers  Wed Sep 27 07:17:40 1995
Return-Path: owner-hackers
Received: (from root@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id HAA01653
          for hackers-outgoing; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 07:17:40 -0700
Received: (from sos@localhost)
          by freefall.freebsd.org (8.6.12/8.6.6) id HAA01643
          ; Wed, 27 Sep 1995 07:17:37 -0700
Message-Id: <199509271417.HAA01643@freefall.freebsd.org>
Subject: Re: Solaris x86
To: uttt@fang.cs.sunyit.edu (Tom T. Tran)
Date: Wed, 27 Sep 1995 07:17:36 -0700 (PDT)
Cc: hackers@freefall.freebsd.org
In-Reply-To: <199509271401.KAA13023@fang.cs.sunyit.edu> from "Tom T. Tran" at Sep 27, 95 10:01:06 am
From: sos@FreeBSD.org
Reply-to: sos@FreeBSD.org
X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4 PL24]
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 776       
Sender: owner-hackers@FreeBSD.org
Precedence: bulk

In reply to Tom T. Tran who wrote:
> 
>         With all the talk of SCO compatability and Linux compatability I was 
> wondering if perhaps Solaris x86 might be on the horizon. I'm curious as to
> whether or not having the system call wrappers for Linux and SCO bring us
> any closer to having Solaris x86 binary compatability.

Hmm, I'm not sure exactly what slowlaris resembels most, but I guess
its SVR4 like. Do you know what kind of binary format they use ??
I have the codebits for running simple SVR4 ELF binaries from a
NCR system, that might be a starting point.


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Soren Schmidt  (sos@FreeBSD.org | sos@login.dknet.dk)  FreeBSD Core Team
               So much code to hack -- so little time