Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1998 21:32:40 -0700 From: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com> To: Kris Kennaway <kkennawa@physics.adelaide.edu.au> Cc: Nate Williams <nate@mt.sri.com>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, Dan Nelson <dnelson@emsphone.com>, rivers@dignus.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: linux software installation and uname Message-ID: <199811100432.VAA09970@mt.sri.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.OSF.4.05.9811101306280.9655-100000@spectrum.physics.adelaide.edu.au> References: <199811092016.NAA06221@mt.sri.com> <Pine.OSF.4.05.9811101306280.9655-100000@spectrum.physics.adelaide.edu.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Ahh, but what happens when I have to run the same applications in the > > same shell? Do I have to modify my environment everytime I run a > > different application? Do I have to remember which 'emulated OS' the > > application runs? > > That's where the proposed "commercial ports" category would come in. Someone > could provide wrappers for installation, executing, etc, which handle all the > messy work of setting environment variables and so forth to get the thing to > run, for things which require a 'tweaked' emulation environment. Is there an echo in the room? Isn't this what I initially proposed as a better alternative to hacking up the uname(1) sources? Nate To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199811100432.VAA09970>