z...@debian.org wrote: >On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 03:03:18PM +0800, Paul Wise wrote: >> Quite ingenious really. > >I'm curious about the set of syscalls they've implemented, and in >particular about which non-POSIX (but Linux) syscalls are in that set. >Has anyone seen that list yet?
As I commented on Dustin's blog, I'm also interested in more technical details: Linux/Unix is more than just the syscalls, there's quite a few places where the Windows model just doesn't match up with the Unix model: processes, threads, filesystem/VFS semantics, ... How does fork() work? How does file locking work with things like shared libraries in this setup? Some Linux programs will be easy to support, some - say, dpkg, are going to be much more involved. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com "Further comment on how I feel about IBM will appear once I've worked out whether they're being malicious or incompetent. Capital letters are forecast." Matthew Garrett, http://www.livejournal.com/users/mjg59/30675.html
