Messages in this thread | | | Date | Thu, 5 Nov 1998 08:13:35 -0800 (PST) | From | Joel Jaeggli <> | Subject | Re: An Idea... |
| |
> There are a variety of emulators for Win95/Linux. I've never seen a Linux > emulator for windows, and I can't see why you'd want one.
Bochs should be able to do this...
http://www.bochs.com/whatisbochs.html#Platforms
> If you wanted > to run a Linux app from winblows you'd have to install the linux version > on the dos partition. Either way its a nice idea that would take an > extremely long and painful task. The benefits are far outweighed by the > technicalities. > > ~~Kev > > On Wed, 4 Nov 1998, J. Patrick Narkinsky wrote: > > > > > Over the weekend, an idea occurred to me that I would be interested in > > developing. Unfortunately, I know squat about kernel programming -- > > hence, I am looking for opinions. > > > > Basically, the idea would be to write a version of Linux that would run > > under Windows* as a regular process. Conceptually, this would be a lot > > like running under a micro-kernel, except that the kernel would be Win32, > > not Mach or whatever. > > > > The obvious first question: is this possible? I'm sure something could be > > done with ELKS or similar, but I don't want a dumbed down version -- I > > want something that I could run say WordPerfect for Linux on. What > > restrictions would something like this be subject to? > > > > The obvious second question: why would I want this? Basically, I work in > > an organization that is very MS-centric and would like to have access to > > my preferred environment at work. Unfortunately, I have to run several > > Microsoft packages, cannot afford to reboot from linux, and can't get a > > second computer. On the other hand, if this concept could be made to work > > well, I could run Linux in a Window on my NT box and switch back and forth > > seemlessly. > > > > Another good use would be to demonstrate linux for newbies. This would be > > very nice -- most people, once they try Linux, don't go back. The problem > > is that just trying it can be a stiff hurdle for the less technically > > adept. > > > > Finally, what would be involved in doing this? Obviously, if I'm going to > > have to re-write, from scratch, the scheduler, the mm code, etc. then its > > hardly worth-while. On the other hand, if I just need to implement a fake > > frame buffer, use UMSDOS and give up on direct hardware, that's doable. > > > > Opinions? (No flames, please) > > > > Patrick > > > > -- > > J. Patrick Narkinsky > > patrick@narkinsky.ml.org > > > > "It is so stupid of modern society to have given up believing in the > > devil when he is the only explanation for it." -- Ronald Knox > > > > > > > > - > > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu > > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ > > > > > - > To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in > the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu > Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ >
-------------------------------------------------------------------------- Joel Jaeggli joelja@darkwing.uoregon.edu Academic User Services consult@gladstone.uoregon.edu PGP Key Fingerprint: 1DE9 8FCA 51FB 4195 B42A 9C32 A30D 121E -------------------------------------------------------------------------- It is clear that the arm of criticism cannot replace the criticism of arms. Karl Marx -- Introduction to the critique of Hegel's Philosophy of the right, 1843.
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |