Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!sol.ctr.columbia.edu! news.kei.com!ub!acsu.buffalo.edu!vohwi-d From: vohw...@acsu.buffalo.edu (David A. Vohwinkel) Subject: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <C83r7C.ILq@acsu.buffalo.edu> Sender: n...@acsu.buffalo.edu Nntp-Posting-Host: autarch-14.acsu.buffalo.edu Organization: UB Date: Fri, 4 Jun 1993 15:04:24 GMT Lines: 10 I was wondering when the next version of SLS will be out. And is there any word when Linus will have version .99pl-10 done??? is this what the makers of SLS are waiting for??? I love the SLS distributions and with all the many GREAT changes lately I want to update all my files but I would like to use the SLS since this is a very easy way for me to do it... Thanks Dave
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu! uwm.edu!linac!uchinews!cs.umd.edu!nmrdc1!dsc3pzp From: dsc3...@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Philip Perucci) Subject: Re: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <C84Jqt.30w@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> Organization: Naval Medical Research & Development Command References: <C83r7C.ILq@acsu.buffalo.edu> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1993 01:20:52 GMT Lines: 33 In article <C83r7C....@acsu.buffalo.edu> vohw...@acsu.buffalo.edu (David A. Vohwinkel) writes: >I was wondering when the next version of SLS will be out. And is there any >word when Linus will have version .99pl-10 done??? is this what the >makers of SLS are waiting for??? I love the SLS distributions and with all >the many GREAT changes lately I want to update all my files but I would >like to use the SLS since this is a very easy way for me to do it... Like yourself, I use SLS... There are a few VERY substantial developments under way, which will take some time: 1) New Linux kernel 0.99pl10 2) New tcp/ip code (a substantial/complete re-write) 3) New libraries 4) New compiler 5) New version of XFree86 1.3 (due mid-June) Since all of this is inter-connected, to do it right will take a while yet. I for one have no problem waiting, being quite happy with SLS 1.02. After looking into NetBSD/386BSD, I am HAPPY to wait. The slow development cycle with ???BSD and lack of a Micrsoft busmouse driver (yes, there is a little known patch out there SOMEWHERE) was quite enlightening. The new 386BSD 0.2 will be out "sometime this summer". Unfortunately, 386BSD 0.2 will not, for the most part, use the patches developed by the comp.os.386bsd.* crowd over the last year. "What we have here, is a failure to communicate"! -- ============================================================================== phil perucci | "Any opinions expressed are my views, dsc3...@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil | not the position of any organization" ==============================================================================
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!emory!sol.ctr.columbia.edu! destroyer!cs.ubc.ca!news.UVic.CA!sanjuan!pmacdona From: pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald) Subject: Re: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <1993Jun5.034102.1879@sol.UVic.CA> Sender: n...@sol.UVic.CA Nntp-Posting-Host: sanjuan.uvic.ca Organization: University of Victoria, Victoria B.C. CANADA References: <C83r7C.ILq@acsu.buffalo.edu> <C84Jqt.30w@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 93 03:41:02 GMT Lines: 22 In article <C84Jqt....@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> dsc3...@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil (Philip Perucci) writes: >In article <C83r7C....@acsu.buffalo.edu> vohw...@acsu.buffalo.edu (David A. Vohwinkel) writes: >>I was wondering when the next version of SLS will be out. And is there any ... >There are a few VERY substantial developments under way, which will >take some time: > > 1) New Linux kernel 0.99pl10 > 2) New tcp/ip code (a substantial/complete re-write) > 3) New libraries > 4) New compiler > 5) New version of XFree86 1.3 (due mid-June) > >Since all of this is inter-connected, to do it right will take a while Couldn't have said it better myself. As some of the veterns recognize, things seem to develop lockstep in a bursts. Add to the above: 6) SVR4 binary support 7) MS Windows translation lib (maybe) Peter
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!sgiblab!a2i!bryanw From: bry...@rahul.net (Bryan Woodworth) Subject: SVR4 binary support (Was re: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <C85pC7.7q9@rahul.net> Sender: n...@rahul.net (Usenet News) Nntp-Posting-Host: bolero Organization: a2i network References: <C83r7C.ILq@acsu.buffalo.edu> <C84Jqt.30w@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> <1993Jun5.034102.1879@sol.UVic.CA> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1993 16:19:19 GMT Lines: 13 In <1993Jun5.034102.1...@sol.UVic.CA> pmacdona@sanjuan (Peter MacDonald) writes: >Couldn't have said it better myself. As some of the veterns recognize, >things seem to develop lockstep in a bursts. Add to the above: > 6) SVR4 binary support > 7) MS Windows translation lib (maybe) >Peter Wow, what does this SVR4 binary support really mean? Can I compile stuff on my SunOs 4.1.1 host and then run the compiled binaries under Linux?!
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Path: gmd.de!xlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!darwin.sura.net!ra! tantalus.nrl.navy.mil!eric From: e...@tantalus.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Youngdale) Subject: Re: SVR4 binary support (Was re: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <C85wL6.EDr@ra.nrl.navy.mil> Sender: use...@ra.nrl.navy.mil Organization: Naval Research Laboratory References: <C84Jqt.30w@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> <1993Jun5.034102.1879@sol.UVic.CA> <C85pC7.7q9@rahul.net> Date: Sat, 5 Jun 1993 18:55:54 GMT Lines: 19 In article <C85pC7....@rahul.net> bry...@rahul.net (Bryan Woodworth) writes: >> 6) SVR4 binary support >> 7) MS Windows translation lib (maybe) > >Wow, what does this SVR4 binary support really mean? Can I compile stuff on >my SunOs 4.1.1 host and then run the compiled binaries under Linux?! Yes. I can currently bring executables from SVr4 to my linux box, and if they are sufficiently simple, I can run them now. The problems all arise because off differences in structure definitions, or because of differences in certain constaints (like ioctl request numbers). The goal is to work around or remove all of these incompatibilities. -Eric -- "When Gregor Samsa woke up one morning from unsettling dreams, he found himself changed in his bed into a lawyer."
Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!howland.reston.ans.net!usc!cs.utexas.edu! utnut!torn!nott!bnrgate!bnr.co.uk!uknet!edcastle!dcs.ed.ac.uk!sct From: s...@dcs.ed.ac.uk (Stephen Tweedie) Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Subject: Re: SVR4 binary support (Was re: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <SCT.93Jun5213503@ascrib.dcs.ed.ac.uk> Date: 5 Jun 93 21:35:03 GMT References: <C83r7C.ILq@acsu.buffalo.edu> <C84Jqt.30w@nmrdc1.nmrdc.nnmc.navy.mil> <1993Jun5.034102.1879@sol.UVic.CA> <C85pC7.7q9@rahul.net> Sender: cn...@dcs.ed.ac.uk (UseNet News Admin) Organization: University of Edinburgh Dept. of Computer Science, Scotland Lines: 25 In-Reply-To: bryanw@rahul.net's message of 5 Jun 93 16:19:19 GMT On 5 Jun 93 16:19:19 GMT, bry...@rahul.net (Bryan Woodworth) said: > Wow, what does this SVR4 binary support really mean? Can I compile > stuff on my SunOs 4.1.1 host and then run the compiled binaries > under Linux?! No, because they have different machine languages. The proposed SVR4 binary support is not just mere emulation; it should run native SVR4 binaries at close to full speed: *BUT*, only binaries from the 386/486 editions of SVR4. There is a lot of commercial software available for i86-SVR4. Being able to run this would be a *major* selling point for Linux. There's a LOT of work that needs to be done here, but the various different parts of the task (supporting the system call and signal interface, loading ELF-format binaries and emulating the SVR4 shared libraries) are being looked at. Don't expect anything dramatic too soon, though! Cheers, Stephen. --- Stephen Tweedie <s...@uk.ac.ed.dcs> (Internet: <s...@dcs.ed.ac.uk>) Department of Computer Science, Edinburgh University, Scotland.
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux Path: gmd.de!newsserver.jvnc.net!darwin.sura.net!ra!tantalus.nrl.navy.mil!eric From: e...@tantalus.nrl.navy.mil (Eric Youngdale) Subject: Re: SVR4 binary support (Was re: SLS 1.03 when please?? Message-ID: <C86CCD.K6B@ra.nrl.navy.mil> Sender: use...@ra.nrl.navy.mil Organization: Naval Research Laboratory References: <C85pC7.7q9@rahul.net> <C85wL6.EDr@ra.nrl.navy.mil> <1993Jun5.213815.9267@kf8nh.wariat.org> Date: Sun, 6 Jun 1993 00:36:12 GMT Lines: 26 In article <1993Jun5.213815.9...@kf8nh.wariat.org> b...@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery) writes: >>>Wow, what does this SVR4 binary support really mean? Can I compile stuff on >>>my SunOs 4.1.1 host and then run the compiled binaries under Linux?! >> >> Yes. I can currently bring executables from SVr4 to my linux box, and > >...which of us is confused? SunOS 4.1.1 is BSD, not SVR4, and no amount of >system call/exec format hacking will make a SPARC executable run on a 386/486 >(and the mere idea of a SoftSPARC is enough to make my head hurt :-) I was the one more confused it seems. I am not sure, but I think that there is one version of Unix that Sun has out that is a variant of SVr4, and I assumed that since the questioner connected SVr4 and SunOS 4.1.1 in the same sentence that this must be the beast. I also recall that Sun does sell some 386 machines, but I have never used them. Anyway, the goal is to be able to run SVr4 binaries provided that they are for the 386/486 architecture. I did not mean to give anyone a headache :-). -Eric -- "When Gregor Samsa woke up one morning from unsettling dreams, he found himself changed in his bed into a lawyer."