Xref: utzoo comp.unix.microport:2572 comp.unix.xenix:4436 Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!portal!cup.portal.com!ts From: ts@cup.portal.com (Tim W Smith) Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport,comp.unix.xenix Subject: Re: System V release 3.2 Message-ID: <13458@cup.portal.com> Date: 12 Jan 89 11:17:48 GMT References: <616@ctisbv.UUCP> <8619@alice.UUCP> Organization: The Portal System (TM) Lines: 33 < In theory this should be very easy. You can create a directory tree, < containing, say Xenix 286 on a Unix 3.2 machine. After logging in (as root) < you chroot to the root of that tree and from then on you should get < 100% identical Xenix behaviour except for speed differences. That is < what my understanding of this binary compatibility is. In this isolated < directory tree you could run the Xenix compiler (without messing around < with filename problems), to generate Xenix binaries. I used to do this when I worked at ISC, except that it was not a 3.2 machine, since those didn't exist yet. We did it on a 1.05 machine, since all that x286emul needs to run most 286 Xenix code is the kernel hooks that let x286emul get control when a system call is executed. The x286emul emulation is pretty good. It passes Microsoft's Xenix validation programs. That is, if you take these programs from a 286 Xenix system, and put them under such a chrooted environment, and run them just like you would to validate a 286 Xenix system, it will pass, except for certain tests that are not expected to pass. I don't recall exactly which tests will not pass, but they tended to be tests of the type where a real Xenix system would return the error ETXTBSY. Because of the way Xenix emulation works, the text is in fact not busy when a Xenix binary runs under x286emul. My memory is getting hazy here, and I may be confusing some details with i286emul, but I think that there will also be failures when execute-only programs are used. x286emul is a user mode program, and so it needs read permission on the Xenix binary to access it. I seem to recall some discussion of various ugly kludges to get around this, but I don't recall if they were used or not. Tim Smith