Re: Wine on amd64 in 32 bit jail
KAYVEN RIESE wrote: > Is there any reason to fear Microsoft viruses infecting Wine programs? In principle, yes, because Wine is supposed to be a complete reimplementation of the win32 API, thus any program that runs differently on Wine than on Windows demonstrates a bug in Wine. (IIRC there are a few Windows viruses that do run on wine.) In practice, any Wine bug that impairs only viruses will probably not be a high priority to get fixed :) ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: Wine on amd64 in 32 bit jail
On 2009-Nov-19 17:12:19 -0600, "Sam Fourman Jr." wrote: >I would like to help get this working.. is there a howto somewhere to >setup a i386 jail on amd64? >I used teh instructions on http://wiki.freebsd.org/Wine (and pointed >the jail to /compat/i386) I haven't tried wine, but I do have an i386 jail on my main amd64 server (primarily to build apps for my netbook) and have managed to build all the apps I want (including Firefox, OpenOffice.org and jdk15). I have a full i386 world installed in the jail and have the following overrides in my environment: MACHINE=i386 UNAME_p=i386 UNAME_m=i386 I did run into problems initially because my i386 userland wasn't aligned with my amd64 kernel but rebuilding both fixed that (I'm running 8.0-RC1 and a bit). Note that some tools that poke around in kernel innards won't work - ps and lsof are the most obvious. ktrace works but the resultant ktrace.out files need to read with an amd64 kdump. >Inside teh jail uname -a still produces this: >FreeBSD i386.puffybsd.com 8.0-RC3 FreeBSD 8.0-RC3 #0: Wed Nov 18 >22:22:44 UTC 2009 root@:/usr/obj/usr/src/sys/WORKSTATION amd64 You are missing the UNAME_x environment variables. >so trying to compile mesa-demos produces this It will compile and run with the above environment changes. -- Peter Jeremy pgp0c7Y3gLsg4.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: Wine on amd64 in 32 bit jail
> Note that some tools that poke around in kernel innards won't work - > ps and lsof are the most obvious. ktrace works but the resultant > ktrace.out files need to read with an amd64 kdump. Some of those issues can be solved by using within 32-bit jail statically linked 64-bit binaries. It does work for ps which is available in /rescue . --Artem ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
PUFFS SoC project?
What is the status of this year's SoC projects? Specifically, does anyone know what happened to PUFFS? (http://wiki.freebsd.org/SOC2009TatsianaSeveryna) ? ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
Re: PUFFS SoC project?
On (21/11/2009 21:40), Ivan Voras wrote: > What is the status of this year's SoC projects? Specifically, does > anyone know what happened to PUFFS? > (http://wiki.freebsd.org/SOC2009TatsianaSeveryna) ? As far as I know it is in a pretty good shape. Tatsiana is busy with real job, and has "passed" maintainership to me. ntfs-3g, puffs-ssh and some other filesystems work, but are largely untested, some fuse filesystems are broken as their support of inode numbers is to weak (take a look at fuse-sshfs). There are some issues regarding cache. Original NetBSD puffs code tends to mmap data to cache it in vm, puffs port doesn't. Besides mmaped pages can go out of sync. If you are interested in working on it, do not hesitate contacting me, I'm interested in finishing the port. Thanks, Gleb. ___ freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-hackers-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
