It's amazing that I didn't know about this emulator. For years I thought
the only game in town for next emulation was mess.

What you're referring to wrt Rosetta is a dynamic recompiler. It would also
need a kernel plug-in to run to make it seem less in the sense that it
would start the recompiler whenever an executable of a given type of
executable was invoked. We have something like this called darling which is
essentially a Mach-o binary loader which used the GNUstep libraries to run
Mac OS X executables. The project shows much promise but is not ready for
production as of yet (Lubos correct me wherever you see fit).

GC
On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 19:52 Dr Tomaž Slivnik <[email protected]> wrote:

> There is Previous, which is a nearly complete NeXT emulator (including
> SCSI) - it will emulate all the different variants (NeXT Computer, NeXT
> Cube, NeXTstation, NeXTstation Color, NeXTstation Turbo, NeXTstation
> TurboColor, NeXT Cube Turbo). It won't emulate NeXTdimension, and Ethernet
> emulation is currently flakey. I think most other things work pretty well.
> Not quite industrial strength yet, it crashes a bit, at least for me, but
> the developed has been making progress at breakneck speed, so an industrial
> strength version can't be far off now.
>
> But of course it's all run within a VM, whereas what I was proposing below
> is an emulation layer at the level of an individual executable, so it can
> co-exist within a single environment like PowerPC and Intel apps can on Mac
> OS X under Rosetta (at least until 10.6).
>
>
> On 20 Nov 2015, at 00:34, Gregory Casamento wrote:
>
> There is a NeXT emulator in MESS. It is currently not fully working. I
> believe the SCSI chip that NeXT used which is the issue since it was
> proprietary.
>
> You do currently need an image of a next hard drive
>
> GC
>
> On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 14:11 Dr Tomaž Slivnik <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> At least in theory it seems to me that e M680x0 emulator could be
>> written, with libraries implementing the 680x0 NeXTSTEP 3.x frameworks
>> being replaced with a translation layer which could be run in native code,
>> implementing the NeXTstep frameworks on top of GnuStep. FreeBSD, at least,
>> also provides a mechanism for installing handlers to support new binary
>> format types.
>>
>> Then you could run all the NeXTSTEP apps intermingled with GnuStep native
>> apps.
>>
>> I don't know just how hard this would be to do in practice, and what the
>> biggest obstacle would be (mapping 680x0 Display Postscript calls to
>> GnuStep primitives? I'm just guessing, I have no idea), but maybe it could
>> be a fun project for someone looking for something interesting to do.
>>
>> On 19 Nov 2015, at 18:30, Gregory Casamento wrote:
>>
>> > It won't.  Lotus Improv was written using NeXTSTEP3.x.   The
>> > frameworks changed a lot between that and OpenStep.   It wouldn't work
>> > without a significant porting effort even if we could get the source.
>> >
>> > On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Adam S <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>> >> Anyone know if Lotus Improv would run/work on GNUStep?
>> >> https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lotus_Improv
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> Discuss-gnustep mailing list
>> >> [email protected]
>> >> https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
>> >>
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Gregory Casamento
>> > GNUstep Lead Developer / OLC, Principal Consultant
>> > http://www.gnustep.org - http://heronsperch.blogspot.com
>> > http://ind.ie/phoenix/
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > Discuss-gnustep mailing list
>> > [email protected]
>> > https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep
>> >
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Discuss-gnustep mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnustep

Reply via email to