How compatible is Linux with SCO binaries ?

[Phil Grace]

Hi can anyone help with a bit of info ?

How compatible is Linux (any version) with SCO Unix 3.2 v 4.2 or SCO
Openserver V.

I have heard it is SOURCE compatible, but do binaries compiled using
the SCO dev system run under Linux ?

Thanks

Phil.

[Evan Jeffrey]

Phil Grace (ph...@nicheltd.demon.co.uk) wrote:
: Hi can anyone help with a bit of info ?

the iBCS module should let you do this (iBCS is intel binary compatability
standard or something), though I haven't personally ever used it.

Evan Jeffrey
erje...@artsci.wustl.edu

[Phil Grace]

Hi can anyone help with a bit of info ?

How compatible is Linux (any version) with SCO Unix 3.2 v 4.2 or SCO
Openserver V.

I have heard it is SOURCE compatible, but do binaries compiled using
the SCO dev system run under Linux ?

Thanks

Phil.

[B.A.Mc...@bham.ac.uk]

In article <3284e4b...@news.demon.co.uk> ph...@nicheltd.demon.co.uk (Phil Grace) writes:
>How compatible is Linux (any version) with SCO Unix 3.2 v 4.2 or SCO
>Openserver V.
>
>I have heard it is SOURCE compatible, but do binaries compiled using
>the SCO dev system run under Linux ?

SCO binary comapatibility is not complete but it quite good. See the
iBCS project "success" list.

--
\\ ( ) No Bullshit! | Email: B.A.Mc...@bham.ac.uk
. _\\__[oo from | Phones: +44 121 471 3789 (home)
.__/ \\ /\@ /~) /~[ /\/[ | +44 121 627 2173 (voice) 2175 (fax)
. l___\\ /~~) /~~[ / [ | PGP-fp: D7 03 2A 4B D8 3A 05 37...
# ll l\\ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ | http://wcl-l.bham.ac.uk/~bam/
###LL LL\\ (Brian McCauley) | Finger: b...@wcl-rs.bham.ac.uk

[Mike Jagdis]

* In message <32863f8f...@news.demon.co.uk>, Phil Grace said:

PG> How compatible is Linux (any version) with SCO Unix 3.2 v
PG> 4.2 or SCO Openserver V.

PG> I have heard it is SOURCE compatible, but do binaries
PG> compiled using the SCO dev system run under Linux ?

Yes, if you get the (misnamed*) iBCS module for Linux from tsx-11.mit.edu
/pub/linux/BETA/ibcs2/ and any needed shared libraries from your old SCO
system. (No, shared - and static - libraries are *not* portable between
platforms even if they are the same binary format. The internals can be
vastly different)

* Misnamed because it doesn't do iBCS. It does SCO, Unixware, INTERACTIVE,
SVR3, SVR4, Wyse V/386... One UNIX to rule them all, one UNIX to find them.
One UNIX to bring them all, and on the PC run them. (Yeah, the paraphrasing
is appalling. I write code, not poetry :-) )

Mike

[James B. Hiller]

Mike Jagdis (ja...@purplet.demon.co.uk) wrote:
[snip]
: * Misnamed because it doesn't do iBCS. It does SCO, Unixware, INTERACTIVE,

: SVR3, SVR4, Wyse V/386... One UNIX to rule them all, one UNIX to find them.
: One UNIX to bring them all, and on the PC run them. (Yeah, the paraphrasing
: is appalling. I write code, not poetry :-) )

: Mike

You don't do yourself (or code) justice...code IS poetry; poetry IS code!

(For those (not including Mike) who might be inclined to brush me off as a
colorless automaton with no art appreciation: consider the structural
building blocks, phrasing, rhythm, and meter of both ilks to see the
comparison. If it's not clear, think about the bit streams. In fact,
I would argue that source is a high form of poetry, being at
least three abstractions above the bit stream, all with total traceability
one level to another as determined by the rules of transformation).

I don't expect to find the Linux source tree in a Reader's Digest(TM)
compilation anytime soon :-) - but the parallels and equivalences are
gratifying to ponder...

The interested party is pointed to "Godel, Escher, and Bach" by
Hofstadter for more on the topic. Yes, I've been afflicted, and it's
glorious!

cheers,
jbh