32 and 16 bit. The boot loaders used and FreeDos required incorporation of
16 bit support. Monumental pain.
We don't see 64 bit support being problematic though.
Gary
On 8/1/08 9:31 AM, "Adam Thornton" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Does z/VOS do x86_64 or just 32-bit x86? Actually, can you lis
On Jul 31, 2008, at 5:08 PM, Gary M. Dennis wrote:
z/VOS translates guest OS code during initial execution. Code fragment
storage, lookup, disposal and reuse for primary and sibling guests are
addressed in a patent application. Suffice it to say that we don't
interpret or emulate massive amounts
Apologies for not responding to this thread in a more timely fashion. I had
a flood of emails after the initial post.
Speed OR Portability
Adam is closer than he knows about the approach we have taken on z/VOS.
First, he is right when he guessed "almost-certainly assembly". We have
tried both Q
On Jul 25, 2008, at 8:48 AM, McKown, John wrote:
Somewhat like BOCH? I remember somebody saying that they ran Windows
on
BOCH on an old P/390.
A little more data: the straight-up portable-emulation x86 code-path
is still not a good idea. I got the current released bochs (20080720)
buil
On Jul 25, 2008, at 8:48 AM, McKown, John wrote:
-Original Message-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary M. Dennis
Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:34 PM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86 architecture
> -Original Message-
> From: The IBM z/VM Operating System
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Gary M. Dennis
> Sent: Thursday, July 24, 2008 9:34 PM
> To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
> Subject: Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86 architecture - NOT.
>
z/VOS is written to support the x86 instruction set and the underlying
hardware rather than a specific operating system. For example, FreeDos was
used as the initial debug target operating system due to source code
availability.
--. .- .-. -.--
Gary Dennis
Mantissa Corporation
On 7/23/08 9
ing System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Barton Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:59 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86 architecture - NOT.
Ok, so reality check folks before y'all start drooling about jobs and
can think you can
ru
-
From: The IBM z/VM Operating System [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Barton Robinson
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2008 10:59 AM
To: IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU
Subject: Re: Nice idea in blog: Should we toss x86 architecture - NOT.
Ok, so reality check folks before y'all start drooling about job
Gary, if it runs native windows, will it also then run x86 linux? That seems
to be one of the barriers for us, that z/linux may not support certain x86
linux
applications.
Thanks,
Mary Anne
> Gary M. Dennis wrote:
>
> Z/VOS is a CMS application. The glass-side user will only see Windows via
>> R
Ok, so reality check folks before y'all start drooling about jobs and can think you can
run 47000 windows servers under VM. In Linux we learned that running compiled code
"natively" on "z", megahertz is megahertz and a CPU intensive task would always run faster
on Intel than on "z" (until we go
11 matches
Mail list logo
