On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 12:57:59PM -0700, Theo de Raadt wrote:
> > On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, ropers wrote:
> > > Was 32-on-64 compatibility somehow easier to achieve on the Linux side?
> > > Or did they just keep throwing code and more code at the problem because
> > > they felt they really, really
> On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, ropers wrote:
> > Was 32-on-64 compatibility somehow easier to achieve on the Linux side?
> > Or did they just keep throwing code and more code at the problem because
> > they felt they really, really had to have this? It's that kind of idle
> > curiosity. If nobody's
On Sat, 11 Mar 2017, ropers wrote:
> Was 32-on-64 compatibility somehow easier to achieve on the Linux side?
> Or did they just keep throwing code and more code at the problem because
> they felt they really, really had to have this? It's that kind of idle
> curiosity. If nobody's interested in
On 11 Mar 2017 at 15:47, ropers wrote:
> On 11 March 2017 at 15:18, Stuart Henderson wrote:
>
> > On 2017/03/10 23:56, ropers wrote:
> > > On 10 March 2017 at 01:30, Stuart Henderson
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > (And unlike Linux, 32-bit OpenBSD
On 11 March 2017 at 15:18, Stuart Henderson wrote:
> On 2017/03/10 23:56, ropers wrote:
> > On 10 March 2017 at 01:30, Stuart Henderson
> > wrote:
> >
> > (And unlike Linux, 32-bit OpenBSD binaries won't run on OpenBSD/
> > amd64)
> >
> >
> >
On 2017/03/10 23:56, ropers wrote:
> On 10 March 2017 at 01:30, Stuart Henderson
> wrote:
>
> (And unlike Linux, 32-bit OpenBSD binaries won't run on OpenBSD/
> amd64)
>
>
> Is there a technical reason for that?
> I'm not trying to demand anything here; just
On Fri, Mar 10, 2017 at 12:23:12AM +0100, Stefan Wollny wrote:
> For the very reason I use OpenBSD: Confidentiality.
Wouldn't running closed source Linux binaries on OpenBSD conflict
with your trust? Those binaries cannot be pledge etc...
IMO it's better if we would have a "VMM bootloader" which
On 2017-03-09, Stefan Wollny <stefan.wol...@web.de> wrote:
>> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 09. März 2017 um 09:43 Uhr
>> Von: "Stuart Henderson" <s...@spacehopper.org>
>> An: misc@openbsd.org
>> Betreff: Re: Please: Is there ANY chance that Linux binaries mi
Am 03/09/17 um 21:55 schrieb Marc Espie:
...
> In my opinion, there's more chance vmm will eventually be mature
> enough to run a virtual linux machine than the return of userland
> linux emulation.
>
This is what I am hoping for - it is just this particular piece of
software that I need from
Am 03/09/17 um 22:44 schrieb bofh:
> On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Stefan Wollny wrote:
>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I have to live up to my obligations - and one of them is to be able to
>> work with M$-Word docs. I used to do this with SoftMaker's office suite,
>> but since
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 4:01 PM, Stefan Wollny wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have to live up to my obligations - and one of them is to be able to
> work with M$-Word docs. I used to do this with SoftMaker's office suite,
> but since Linux-compat is gone I am stuck with
To clarify, from what I remember, killing linux compat was not
a political decision per-se ("emulation is bad").
Rather, it is that the emulation was 32 bits-only, and more and
more out-of-date so completelely useless, and also not really
very maintained, so it amounted to more code with possible
> Gesendet: Donnerstag, 09. März 2017 um 09:43 Uhr
> Von: "Stuart Henderson" <s...@spacehopper.org>
> An: misc@openbsd.org
> Betreff: Re: Please: Is there ANY chance that Linux binaries might run
again???
>
> On 2017-03-07, Stefan Wollny <stefan.wol...@web.de&
On 2017-03-07, Stefan Wollny wrote:
> at home this is the way I go, too. But I have to travel to my client's
> place (by train!) and when working in the evening in the hotel room like
> tonight (as I have to leave the office building by 8 pm at the latest)
> it is somewhat
Am 03/07/17 um 23:32 schrieb Stefan Wollny:
> at home this is the way I go, too. But I have to travel to my client's
> place (by train!) and when working in the evening in the hotel room like
> tonight (as I have to leave the office building by 8 pm at the latest)
> it is somewhat inconvenient to
March 2017 05:39
To: misc@openbsd.org
Subject: Re: Please: Is there ANY chance that Linux binaries might run
again???
Softmaker doesn't support any of the BSDs - they've done it years ago
for FreeBSD but the customer's interest was too little.
Am 07.03.17 um 23:52 schrieb Damian McGuckin
Softmaker doesn't support any of the BSDs - they've done it years ago
for FreeBSD but the customer's interest was too little.
Am 07.03.17 um 23:52 schrieb Damian McGuckin:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stefan Wollny wrote:
>
>> Yes - I will (again) contact SoftMaker trying to persuade them to
>> provide
On Wed, 8 Mar 2017 09:52:39 +1100 (AEDT)
Damian McGuckin wrote:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stefan Wollny wrote:
>
> > Yes - I will (again) contact SoftMaker trying to persuade them to
> > provide an OpenBSD-version of their office suite. But they seem to
> > have none with some
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Stefan Wollny wrote:
Yes - I will (again) contact SoftMaker trying to persuade them to
provide an OpenBSD-version of their office suite. But they seem to have
none with some decent Unix/OpenBSD-knowledge, just Linux. Sigh...
I would buy SoftMaker on OpenBSD.
Regards -
Am 03/07/17 um 22:50 schrieb Damian McGuckin:
> On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
>
>> Regarding your task at hand:
>>
>> If you want to run MS Word, your best bet is running MS Windows.
>> If you want to run binary-only Linux software, your best bet is
>> running Linux. Ideally, on
Am 03/07/17 um 22:43 schrieb Ingo Schwarze:
> Hi,
>
> Stefan Wollny wrote on Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 10:01:49PM +0100:
>
>> ANY chance that there will be a way to run Linux binaries again?
>
> Usually, i'm wary of making definite statements about the future,
> but in this case, a clear "NO" semms
One alternative, for production of Word documents, might be to use
Pandoc for converting from a lightweight markup language to DOCX. There
is no OpenBSD package for Pandoc, and building it OpenBSD can be tricky,
but I have succeeded with GHC 7.10.3 (wxallowed has to be enabled on
home and tmp).
On Tue, 7 Mar 2017, Ingo Schwarze wrote:
Regarding your task at hand:
If you want to run MS Word, your best bet is running MS Windows.
If you want to run binary-only Linux software, your best bet is
running Linux. Ideally, on dedicated hardware that is not
connected to the Internet.
We use
Hi,
Stefan Wollny wrote on Tue, Mar 07, 2017 at 10:01:49PM +0100:
> ANY chance that there will be a way to run Linux binaries again?
Usually, i'm wary of making definite statements about the future,
but in this case, a clear "NO" semms like a very safe bet.
Syscall compat layers cause
I believe that the short answer is no, but devs will know for sure.
-l
On Tue, Mar 7, 2017 at 3:01 PM, Stefan Wollny wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> I have to live up to my obligations - and one of them is to be able to
> work with M$-Word docs. I used to do this with SoftMaker's
Hi there,
I have to live up to my obligations - and one of them is to be able to
work with M$-Word docs. I used to do this with SoftMaker's office suite,
but since Linux-compat is gone I am stuck with LibreOffice which is just
a PITA.
As at the end of the day I have to deliver results in a form
26 matches
Mail list logo