lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1998]   [Apr]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: Wlinux vs. LWin95, looking at the alternative
    On Thu, 9 Apr 1998, Richard Jones wrote:

    > Stephen D. Williams wrote:
    > > On the other hand, as I mentioned earlier, it might be possible to
    > > make Linux the more native OS and Win95 the more virtualized OS. If
    > > ALL of the Win95 devices were virtual devices to Linux, then only
    > > memory management and processor mode remains to be dealt with. What
    > > if Linux reserved most of upper memory and fooled Win95 into believing
    > > that there was less memory (easy due to the reliance on Bios)?
    > [...]
    >
    > As I understand it, there are only a few commands that
    > can't be properly virtualized on the i386 processors. Is

    They will trap with 'invalid instruction', and can (in
    theory) be deassembled and emulated JIT...
    [well, _can_ they??? I don't know enough about x86 to really know]

    > it possible that there are only a few tiny patches to the
    > Win95 `binary' that need to be made to make it behave itself
    > in a virtualized 386 environment? Perhaps someone who knows
    > more about this than me can comment ...

    Rik.
    +-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+
    | Linux: - LinuxHQ MM-patches page | Scouting webmaster |
    | - kswapd ask-him & complain-to guy | Vries cubscout leader |
    | http://www.fys.ruu.nl/~riel/ | <H.H.vanRiel@fys.ruu.nl> |
    +-------------------------------------------+--------------------------+


    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:42    [W:8.514 / U:0.636 seconds]
    ©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site