4 Jan
2002
4 Jan
'02
3:10 a.m.
Replies throughout.....
I have not-too-much experince with VMS, so bear with
me, but wouldn't it
be possible to do one of the following options:
1) Stick an 'emulation' user-mode shell on top of some free *nix
2) Take a stock free *nix kernel, and modify it to work more like VMS.
That was the idea. I thought of taking FreeBSD, and add device drivers for
peripherals and filesystems, as well as implementing the "shell".
I do have various VAXen to test this on.
Of course, the problem is deciding what ONE kernel to
use (prolly BSD or
Linux 2.??), and how to trim down the kernel to a small set of drivers for
testing it.
I was thinking about using FreeBSD, simply for the availability of many
platform ports, including VAX.
- 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...
4 Jan
4 Jan
5:04 a.m.
On 2002.01.04 18:10 Matthew Sell wrote:
I was thinking about using FreeBSD, simply for the
availability of
many platform ports, including VAX.
Ahhh? Are you mixing up FreeBSD and NetBSD?
FreeBSD is a PeeCee (and
Alpha) thing while NetBSD is the multi platform OS that runs on VAXen
and around two dozen other architectures.
Besides that, I think it would be hard to turn a *ix kernel in a VMS
like kernel. E. g. VMS has a very different security and shared library
model.
--
tsch??,
Jochen
Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz/
2:48 p.m.
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Matthew Sell wrote:
You might be able to get the feel of VMS, but getting all the neat
features of VMS (decnet, clustering, binary compatibility) would be highly
problematic. Plus administration would be a completely different animal.
If you want BSD that works the same on all sorts of hardware, FreeBSD is
not it. It's too x86-centric. Look at NetBSD http://www.netbsd.org/
Peace... Sridhar
be possible to
do one of the following options:
1) Stick an 'emulation' user-mode shell on top of some free *nix
2) Take a stock free *nix kernel, and modify it to work more like VMS.
That was the idea. I thought of taking FreeBSD, and add device drivers for
peripherals and filesystems, as well as implementing the "shell".
I do have various VAXen to test this on. Of course, the
problem is deciding what ONE kernel to use (prolly BSD or
Linux 2.??), and how to trim down the kernel to a small set of drivers for
testing it.
I was thinking about using FreeBSD, simply for the availability of many
platform ports, including VAX. 
5 Jan
5 Jan
12:37 a.m.
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Boatman on the River of Suck wrote:
If you want BSD that works the same on all sorts of hardware, FreeBSD is
not it. It's too x86-centric. Look at NetBSD http://www.netbsd.org/
<flame>
If you had read more of his posts yesterday, you would see he said he
meant 'NetBSD'.
</flame>
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Matthew Sell wrote:
You might be able to get the feel of VMS, but getting all the neat
features of VMS (decnet, clustering, binary compatibility) would be highly
problematic. Plus administration would be a completely different animal.
Binary compatibility between a peecee running 'FreeVMS' (one
possibility for hardware and OpenVMS on a VAX/Alpha??? I know I didn't
mean that, and I don't think that the author did either. I was thinking
of this as being something to let you run pseudo-VMS on something cheap
but relatively fast (peecee or whatever).
be
possible to do one of the following options:
1) Stick an 'emulation' user-mode shell on top of some free *nix
2) Take a stock free *nix kernel, and modify it to work more like VMS.
That was the idea. I thought of taking FreeBSD, and add device drivers for
peripherals and filesystems, as well as implementing the "shell".
I do have various VAXen to test this on. Of course,
the problem is deciding what ONE kernel to use (prolly BSD or
Linux 2.??), and how to trim down the kernel to a small set of drivers for
testing it.
I was thinking about using FreeBSD, simply for the availability of many
platform ports, including VAX. Peace... Sridhar
that is all.
-- Pat
4:28 a.m.
On Sat, 5 Jan 2002, Pat Finnegan wrote:
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Boatman on the River of Suck
wrote:
No, binary compatibility between a VAX running FreeVMS and one running
VMS.
Peace... Sridhar
On Fri, 4 Jan 2002, Matthew Sell wrote:
You might be able to get the feel of VMS, but getting all the neat
features of VMS (decnet, clustering, binary compatibility) would be highly
problematic. Plus administration would be a completely different animal.
Binary compatibility between a peecee running 'FreeVMS' (one
possibility for hardware and OpenVMS on a VAX/Alpha??? I know I didn't
mean that, and I don't think that the author did either. I was thinking
of this as being something to let you run pseudo-VMS on something cheap
but relatively fast (peecee or whatever). be
possible to do one of the following options:
1) Stick an 'emulation' user-mode shell on top of some free *nix
2) Take a stock free *nix kernel, and modify it to work more like VMS.
That was the idea. I thought of taking FreeBSD, and add device drivers for
peripherals and filesystems, as well as implementing the "shell".
I do have various VAXen to test this on.
8338
days inactive
8339
days old
4 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
jkunz＠unixag-kl.fh-kl.de -
msell＠ontimesupport.com -
pat＠purdueriots.com -
vance＠ikickass.org