On Thu, 13 Jul 2000, "Šiogo" Sperb Schneider wrote:
> > Because you would have to rewrite the kernel almost
> > completely. Memory
> > management, scheduling, etc. It would be a
> > completely different kernel,
> > so it wouldn't be Linux.
>
> Linux is not just a kernel. To be sincere, the kernel
> is the least important part of the OS. It just makes
> the communication between software and hardware. What
> makes Linux so special are the GNU tools made for it
> (actually for their own flavor of free UNIX clone).
Making an MSX port of Linux would only make sense if Linux programs would
compile on Linux-MSX without thorough modification. I doubt that is
possible. The 64K address space of the Z80 is a real pain. Ofcourse it is
possible in theory, but it would be like a virtual machine running on the
Z80 to emulate the features the Z80 lacks in hardware. Speed would be
horrible.
I think porting Unix programs to UZIX is a much easier approach. As part of
the porting process, functionality that is not needed can be thrown out, so
that a lightweight version emerges that can run on MSX at a practical speed
and memory usage.
The "Linux for 8086" project (ELKS?) is not really a Linux, it's a subset
of Linux. We could make a Linux subset for MSX, but why bother, UZIX is
already there and it's making great progress.
Bye,
Maarten
****
MSX Mailinglist. To unsubscribe, send an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
and put "unsubscribe msx [EMAIL PROTECTED]" (without the quotes) in
the body (not the subject) of the message.
Problems? contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
More information on MSX can be found in the following places:
The MSX faq: http://www.faq.msxnet.org/
The MSX newsgroup: comp.sys.msx
The MSX IRC channel: #MSX on Undernet
****
