[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
> Raul wrote: [valid points deleted] In other words, it's not a simple
> port. There are at least a few substantial issues to be resolved.
My apologies for the over-simplistic answer. I was assuming the questioner
was cognizant of the 68k booting/loading issues.
> Yes. Furthermore, different architectures may need different
> patches
Offhand, the architecture-specific areas I can think of are:
1. Lots of kernel issues - startup, vm, interrupts, device handling.
2. LILO and its ilk don't apply to other architectures.
3. Does GAS support your instruction set?
4. bin86 doesn't apply.
5. Has gcc/g++ been retargeted to your architecture?
You can probably bring up more. We might eventually consider adding
arch/{386,68k,alpha,arm,ppc} directories to our source tree, so that things
like bin86 can be segrated from the architecture-independent software.
I would hope that the ELF format, the mmap interface, and the kernel API would
insulate most user-mode programs from any architecture-dependence. If programs
are using assembler, either through asm statements or .s files, I'd hope they
would also provide a C equivalent.
Thanks
Bruce
--
-- Attention Radio Amateurs: For information on "Linux for Hams",
-- read the WWW page http://www.hams.com/LinuxForHams,
-- or e-mail the word "help" to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
