X86/PPC linking (was Re: [Darwine] Re: Wine Emulation: Swapping
jim at pagesmiths.com
Thu Aug 26 18:45:25 CDT 2004
Mike Hearn wrote:
>> As for swapping functions, the preceding discussion reiterates my
>> belief that we should confine such fussy business to the relatively
>> small bit of code that calls into OS X, will be relatively stable over
>> the long haul, and over which we have full control. And as for the
>> concern over having Wine be X86 and hence incurring emulation
>> overhead, this would be one of the first bits of code which would be a
>> candidate for having its emulator-compiled code cached.
> If you look at how many native imports Wine requires on Linux to get
> full functionality I don't think you can say it's relatively small. It's
> many thousands of functions, possibly more. It's hard to measure because
> so much is dynamically loaded.
This is the more general project that has emerged from my initial idea
for Darwine, namely X86/Linux binary compatibility for OS X. There are
quite a few folks working on various combinations of
Linux/BSD/Darwin/Mach compatibility, but only for the native processor.
While there has been a ton of end user interest in Darwine in order to
run Windows apps, I have found that integrating CPU emulation into the
kernel compatibility layer attracts broad developer interest. As we
work through the implementation of Darwine I believe we will have
solutions for all these problems and OS X will indeed become quite the
Swiss Army knife of platforms.
More information about the wine-devel