From owner-freebsd-sparc Wed Jan 19 18:36:48 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-sparc@freebsd.org Received: from ns2.via-net-works.net.ar (ns2.via-net-works.net.ar [200.10.100.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 419B315384 for ; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 18:36:44 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from Recabarren!fpscha@ns2.via-net-works.net.ar) Received: by ns2.via-net-works.net.ar (8.9.3/8.9.3) id XAA19107; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 23:35:38 -0300 (GMT) >Received: (from fpscha@localhost) by localhost.schapachnik.com.ar (8.8.8/8.8.5) id XAA00948; Wed, 19 Jan 2000 23:36:10 -0300 (ART) Message-Id: <200001200236.XAA00948@localhost.schapachnik.com.ar> Subject: Re: Sparc Port -- sounds good to me In-Reply-To: from Lyndon Griffin at "Jan 19, 0 07:29:35 am" To: lgriffin@bsd4us.org (Lyndon Griffin) Date: Wed, 19 Jan 2000 23:36:09 -0300 (ART) Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG From: "Fernando P. Schapachnik" X-OS: FreeBSD 2.2.6 - http://www.freebsd.org X-Mailer: ELM [version 2.4ME+ PL38 (25)] MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Sender: owner-freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org En un mensaje anterior Lyndon Griffin escribió: > While porting the kernel may be the most difficult, porting the userland > will certainly be tedious - once something is ported, it will need to Let me show my ignorance here. If we have a kernel running on SPARC and a native compiler working fine, isn't porting userland == make world? At least for the code that doesn't use assembler (which should be most of it)? (I asume a NO answer, but can't imagine why). Anyone care to enlighten me? Thanks! Fernando P. Schapachnik fernando@schapachnik.com.ar | Atención: Mensaje generado en entorno libre de productos M$. No contiene | | HTML, adjuntos en Word ni basura similar. Leer con tranquilidad. | To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-sparc" in the body of the message