5 Jan
2002
5 Jan
'02
12:22 p.m.
The VAX 11/780 is a 32-bit machine. Nuff' said.
- Matt
Matthew Sell
Programmer
On Time Support, Inc.
www.ontimesupport.com
(281) 296-6066
Join the Metrology Software discussion group METLIST!
http://www.ontimesupport.com/cgi-bin/mojo/mojo.cgi
"One World, One Web, One Program" - Microsoft Promotional Ad
"Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Fuhrer" - Adolf Hitler
Many thanks for this tagline to a fellow RGVAC'er...
way so that
some of the programs I tend to write would work. I guess you're
going to try to make a FreeVMS for VAX clone, emulating 64 bits on a 32 bit
machine would be a project killer from the start.
Weren't there vaxen that didnt support the 64bit instructions? From
reading (excessively) the VAX Architecure Handbook, I seem to also
remember it saying that the address space was only 32bits. I could easily
be wrong, and it woudn't suprise me too much. Anyways, FreeVMS on a Sun
Enterprise 10k (or S/390 -- zSeries) would be cool, if not horribly wrong.
:P
Personally (as I stated in my original post) I don't know much about VMS,
yet, I was just trying to throw some ideas off the top of my head.
-- Pat 
6 Jan
6 Jan
7:28 p.m.
Remember the below comments are based on a rusty view of
vms v3.x (before command histories)
I have "PC DCL", it's a DOS shell that looks / acts like DCL.
It's fun while it lasts but I miss some things about VMS/DCL
- Authorize
- Privilidges
- the "version number" nnnnnnnn.eee;vvv
- The other things I never learned about as an operator
I think the tack of taking one of the Linux/netbsd... etc
and putting on a DCL shell is not what is wanted.
An X86 machine would never be able to run VMS binaries, but
I don't think *nix is close enough to VMS to perform that
feat.
The rights situation is all different. The filesystem dosn't
have version numbers, and I think most of them keep diferent
dates (not the same dates as VMS).
7 Jan
7 Jan
3:29 a.m.
On Mon, 2002-01-07 at 01:28, Ron Hudson wrote:
Remember the below comments are based on a rusty view
of
vms v3.x (before command histories)
I have "PC DCL", it's a DOS shell that looks / acts like DCL.
It's fun while it lasts but I miss some things about VMS/DCL
- Authorize
- Privilidges
- the "version number" nnnnnnnn.eee;vvv
- The other things I never learned about as an operator
I think the tack of taking one of the Linux/netbsd... etc
and putting on a DCL shell is not what is wanted.
An X86 machine would never be able to run VMS binaries, but
I don't think *nix is close enough to VMS to perform that
feat.
Well, I don't believe that even Itanium has the 4 level protection
structure that the VAX/Alpha has, but the Compaq engineers are porting
VMS to it anyway.
The rights situation is all different. The filesystem dosn't
have version numbers, and I think most of them keep diferent
dates (not the same dates as VMS).
Why not use a unix kernel as simply a layer for device drivers which
provides a common interface to the hardware? Sure there might have to
be some funky workarounds for things like shared memory, and process
structure, but those are implementation details. The AROS project did
this for AmigaDOS: built the libraries as linux shared libraries and
executables. When that was working well enough, they wrote a simple
kernel which provided enough services for them to load the libraries and
executables. There is a caveat compared to AROS: AmigaDOS is a shared
address-space OS, whereas VMS has separate address spaces for each
program. This might be a problem, though I believe there has been a
unix on unix implementation (where each program got its own process
space).
A similar approach might work for VMS. Implement a 'kernel' as a unix
program, and work from there. Things like filesystems and privs would
get handled by this program (or others linked to it) and could be tested
one at a time until a base system is available, at which point it could
be implemented on other hardware as standalone.
Brian Wheeler
bdwheele(a)indiana.edu
5:58 a.m.
On Mon, Jan 07, 2002 at 09:29:57AM -0500, Brian Wheeler wrote:
executables. There is a caveat compared to AROS: AmigaDOS is a shared
address-space OS, whereas VMS has separate address spaces for each
program. This might be a problem, though I believe there has been a
unix on unix implementation (where each program got its own process
space).
There exists at least UML == User Mode Linux. This is a port of the
Linux kernel to its own syscall interface. With UML you have a full
kernel running as a normal process - providing a full Linux environment.
This can be used for quite some interesting things - security (virtual
hosting, chroot() on steroids, ...) and development (debug the live
kernel, try to crash it, ...) are a few that come to mind.
Regards,
Alex.
--
q: If you were young again, would you start writing TeX again or would
you use Microsoft Word, or another word processor?
a: I hope to die before I *have* to use Microsoft Word.
-- Harald Koenig <koenig(a)tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de> asking Donald E. Knuth
8228
days inactive
8230
days old
3 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
als＠thangorodrim.de -
bdwheele＠indiana.edu -
msell＠ontimesupport.com -
rhudson＠cnonline.net