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 Tue, 14 Apr 1998, Rik van Riel wrote:

> 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]

anything can be emulated. don't ever think otherwise. there is currently a
working nintendo 64 emulator for win95. *anything* can be emulated on
*any* hardware (provided the display is suitable).

> > 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 ...

_ _ __ __ _ _ _
| / |/ /_ __/ /_____ | Nuke Skyjumper |
| / / // / '_/ -_) | "Master of the Farce" |
|_ /_/|_/\_,_/_/\_\\__/ _|_ nuke@bayside.net _|


-
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:1.334 / U:0.020 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site