From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Brian Wolfe Subject: Re: win4lin-like porting of win98 to xen? Date: Sun, 10 Oct 2004 19:33:57 -0500 Sender: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net Message-ID: <1097454837.14877.292.camel@enigma.office.terrabox.com> References: <1097425028.2679.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1097437140.2679.195.camel@localhost.localdomain> <200410102341.03482.mark.williamson@cl.cam.ac.uk> <4169CE4E.6080905@blueyonder.co.uk> Reply-To: brianw@terrabox.com Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <4169CE4E.6080905@blueyonder.co.uk> Errors-To: xen-devel-admin@lists.sourceforge.net List-Unsubscribe: , List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: To: david.nospam.hopwood@blueyonder.co.uk Cc: Xen Devel Mailing List List-Id: xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org Sounds like reactOS is the best hope then. 8-P Took a peek earlier and liked what I saw about thier project. On Sun, 2004-10-10 at 19:05, David Hopwood wrote: > Mark A. Williamson wrote: > > >>This approach would enable running Win4Lin. My idea would be, instead, > >>to replace Win4Lin entirely. > > > > That suggests using some kind of Xen-compatible kernel that can provide the > > DOS syscalls Win 9x needs to run. > > This certainly won't work. Despite their reliance on DOS for some drivers, > Win9x are not strictly layered on DOS; they are 32-bit protected-mode OSes > that also rely heavily on direct hardware access. > > Duplicating the approach used by Win4Lin is also not a feasible amount of > work; it's almost a rewrite of the lower layers of Win9x. ------------------------------------------------------- This SF.net email is sponsored by: IT Product Guide on ITManagersJournal Use IT products in your business? Tell us what you think of them. Give us Your Opinions, Get Free ThinkGeek Gift Certificates! Click to find out more http://productguide.itmanagersjournal.com/guidepromo.tmpl