Date: Wed, 5 May 1999 21:31:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Pat Lynch <lynch@rush.net> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@zippy.cdrom.com> Cc: James Howard <howardjp@wam.umd.edu>, jgrosch@MooseRiver.com, Brett Glass <brett@lariat.org>, jmutter@netwalk.com, "Viren R. Shah" <viren@rstcorp.com>, Steve Kargl <sgk@troutmask.apl.washington.edu>, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: PCWeek article by Anne Chen -- Comments Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.05.9905052130430.995-100000@bytor.rush.net> In-Reply-To: <37654.925939627@zippy.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I've always described it to students and friends as "System Call
Translation" (which I guess technically its not that either) -Pat
___________________________________________________________________________
Pat Lynch lynch@rush.net
Systems Administrator Rush Networking
"Wow, everyone looks different in Real Life (tm)"-
Nathan Dorfman meeting people at FUNY
"Suicide is painless, switching to NT isn't."-
Unknown
___________________________________________________________________________
On Wed, 5 May 1999, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> The fundamental problem is that "emulation" is the wrong word here but
> people use it anyway. What FreeBSD offers isn't "Linux emulation",
> it's "Linux binary compatibility." The dividing line may seem thin,
> but "Emulation" conjures up all kinds of visions of the binary
> actually being emulated through some tortuous series of extra steps
> rather than a binary simply calling a different syscall table (not an
> extra one, just a *different* one).
>
> Be sure and try to make that point in any interviews you do; I do.
> [And I'm sure Brett has something to say about this, but I don't care. :)]
>
> - Jordan
>
> > On Wed, 5 May 1999, Josef Grosch wrote:
> >
> > > On Tue, May 04, 1999 at 10:50:37PM -0600, Brett Glass wrote:
> > > > It does reflect the weaknesses in the current marketing and promotion
> > > > of FreeBSD. In particular, the article mentions the lack of native
> > > > application support. (Running Linux binaries under emulation isn't
> > > > acceptable to the IT crowd; the platform must be SUPPORTED by the
> > > > application vendor.)
> >
> > I've been using FreeBSD for years and have no objection to running Linux
> > programs in emulation mode. However, I have seen this by IT people
> > before. Maybe it would be more advantagous to rephrase it as "Native
> > Linux Binary" support or something similar just to catch those in IT who
> > aren't bright enough to understand what that means.
> >
> > Jamie
> >
> >
> >
> > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
>
>
>
> To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
> with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
>
To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.05.9905052130430.995-100000>