Date: Wed, 28 Feb 1996 14:25:05 -0800 (PST) From: Jake Hamby <jehamby@lightside.com> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: Terry Lambert <terry@lambert.org>, "Amancio Hasty Jr." <hasty@rah.star-gate.com>, root@dihelix.com, hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Quake's out, where's that Linux ELF emulation? Message-ID: <Pine.AUX.3.91.960228142023.29617A-100000@covina.lightside.com> In-Reply-To: <3781.825544043@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, 28 Feb 1996, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote: > > The situation is not aided by the fact that the BSD camp emulates > > the Linux ABI sufficiently well that companies are of the opinion > > that they can save themselves a porting effort. > > That depends on whether or not you view the UNIX market as one capable > of sustaining native versions of all the major players anymore. No > good winning a battle if it costs you the war. Well, certainly being able to run the Linux version is better than no version at all, right? Also, if our Linux ABI is reasonably efficient (as it seems to be), then would there be any significant further gain to make a "native" port? For many applications, it seems unlikely. After all, we're just patching Linux system calls through to our kernel, it's not as if we actually have to go user their crummy KERNEL (although we do have to use their shared libraries...). Anyway, I agree with Jordan on this, better to work on the ELF support in FreeBSD then tell vendors, "Oh by the way, the Linux version of your program works GREAT on FreeBSD, why don't you advertise it as FreeBSD-compatible too (and maybe think about doing a native port for your next version)?" :-) ---Jake
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.AUX.3.91.960228142023.29617A-100000>