SCO emulator for Linux
bill
(fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
indefinite future.
Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
--
bill
Technical Service Systems
bill (atsign) TechServSys (period) com
unix is user friendly, it is just careful who it befriends
Steve Kirkendall
> We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
> (fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
> have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
> control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
> indefinite future.
>
> Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
Well, the Linux kernel has some significant-sounding options in the
"Binary emulation of other systems" category:
SVR3/SVR4 (and derivates) binary emulation support
UnixWare 7.x binary emulation support
iBCS2/iABI4 binary emulation support
SCO OpenServer 5/SCO Unix 3.x/Xenix binary emulation support
Kernel support for COFF binaries
Kernel support for x.out binaries
I've never tried any of this. I read about it once, years ago, and I
vaguely recall that there was some conflict concerning shared libraries
which required you to set the LD_PRELOAD environment variable or
something like that.
As you can imagine, searching the web for "sco" and "linux" yields
thousands of messages, mostly about legal issues. Here are a few
links that contain some scraps of information about emulation:
http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue48/tag/40.html
http://www.matrixlist.com/pipermail/leaplist/2002-March/018794.html
http://www.matrixlist.com/pipermail/leaplist/2002-March/018795.html
http://www.mozillaquest.com/Linux03/ScoSource-01_Story01.html
Dan Skinner
> We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
> (fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
> have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
> control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
> indefinite future.
>
> Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
Can you explain why they would run an application on an unsupported
(by ap vendor) os that they don't know will work rather than a
supported os (again by ap vendor) that they know works and will work
in the forseeable future even if the os vendor fails to support it?
Long term the ap vendor will port or risk having no place to run in
the future.
The port may however not be to Linux.
After they port dump SCO.
We ported our ap from SCO to Linux a couple of years ago for cost
reasons. It now looks like we were clairvoyant. We are however
advising clients running on
SCO boxes which meet current needs to stay put till there is a
performance or functional reason to change.
IMHO to do otherwise would be FUD.
Regards...dan
JDanSkinner.com
Samuel Bronson
> The port may however not be to Linux.
As in *BSD? How many proprietary apps have native BSD binaries?
--
<knghtbrd> eek, not another one...
<knghtbrd> Seems ever developer and their mother now has a random
signature using irc quotes ...
<knghtbrd> WHAT HAVE I STARTED HERE??
bill
> bill <nob...@spamcop.net> wrote in message news:<vljnhd...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>>We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
>>(fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
>>have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
>>control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
>>indefinite future.
>>
>>Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
>
>
> Can you explain why they would run an application on an unsupported
> (by ap vendor) os that they don't know will work rather than a
> supported os (again by ap vendor) that they know works and will work
> in the forseeable future even if the os vendor fails to support it?
> Long term the ap vendor will port or risk having no place to run in
> the future.
Sure, they/we are looking 2 years into the future. I have a hard time
recommending an OS that might be unsupported and not upgradable to new
hardware. Cost is a strong 2nd reason.
The app vendor has win support only from now on. I would rather run
under Linux emulation than win !
> The port may however not be to Linux.
> After they port dump SCO.
> We ported our ap from SCO to Linux a couple of years ago for cost
> reasons. It now looks like we were clairvoyant. We are however
> advising clients running on
> SCO boxes which meet current needs to stay put till there is a
> performance or functional reason to change.
> IMHO to do otherwise would be FUD.
> Regards...dan
> JDanSkinner.com
--
bill
Thank you !
Anyone here have any experience running SCO apps under emulation ?
FyRE
>We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
>(fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
>have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
>control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
>indefinite future.
>
>Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
Actually it's quite simple to emulate a SCO OS using Linux:
1) Download archived kernel source (the latter 2.0.x kernels should
suffice)
2) Build the kernel with the absolute bare minimum of drivers - only
network cards and SCSI adaptors from over 5 years ago. No graphics
drivers at all.
3) Reboot!
4) Withdraw a few hundred dollars from your bank account, and set fire
to the bills.
--
FyRE < "Ready Cursor" >
FDR
Actually Caldera at one time was going down this path and we explored it.
It may have been called iBCS, I can't remember. I think it was dropped
because they had to include the SCO libaries or someting but there was an
entry into SourceForge at the time. Ancient history now and if your app
vendor can't recompile (we do have a new C compiler out now), my view is
you get a new application. We have been running production on Linux for
almost four years.........and we do ERP, Distro, Accounting and CRM. We
have competitors so the old mantra about no apps is bunko.....fdr
Dan Skinner
> Dan Skinner wrote:
>
> > bill <nob...@spamcop.net> wrote in message n Sure, they/we are looking 2 years into the future. I have a hard time
> hardware. Cost is a strong 2nd reason.
>
> The app vendor has win support only from now on. I would rather run
> under Linux emulation than win !
> > > The port may however not be to Linux.
> > After they port dump SCO.
In otherwords the ap vendor has ported (Windows as I suspected) and
you are displeased. Further you think running an already obsolete
emulation of a currently obsolete os 2 years in the future is the best
way for your customer to preserve an investment in the current ap.
Sounds like anti-Microsoft FUD to a dangerous level. If you feel that
strongly about Windows, something we share, I suggest you find a
replacement ap which meets their needs and runs on your prefered os.
IMHO a hack job is no way to run a mission critical application. If
it's not mission critical and doesn't meet operating environment
standards, a new ap which does is in order. AFAIC one finds the
software which best meets requirements then runs it in the environment
it is most happy. The old "If you need to drive a nail, put down the
screw driver and pick up a hammer" applies. My advice. Don't let a
bias cause you to give bad advice.
Regards...Dan.
David Font
application that ran in XENIX and OSR5.
But when the kernal upgrade took place in Caldera3.1.1 I couldnt get IBCS to
work.
Perhaps someone in this group might be able to enlighten me as well.
"Steve Kirkendall" <skirk...@dsl-only.net> wrote in message
news:3f5a...@nntp0.pdx.net...
Stuart Marshall
> We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
> (fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
> have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
> control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
> indefinite future.
>
> Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
I've had mixed experiences.
A good starting point is the ABI project, see :-
http://linux-abi.sourceforge.net/
Basically "simple" binaries seem to work just fine - anything that talks
to hardware directly seems to run into problems (for example I've had
no luck in getting a comms module we've written to work; recompiling it
on Linux directly works fine).
There are unofficial versions of ABI available for newer Linux kernels,
I've got things running just fine here on a 2.4.20 version.
I'd definitely recommend once you get things working though to compile
what you need into the Linux kernel - if only so you don't forget to
load the modules :-) ... the amount of time our production machine
has failed!!
What do you want to run under Linux?
Cheers,
Stuart.
--
More To Life Than This - www.miketramp.com
Stuart J. Browne
news:3f5bade1$0$243$cc9e...@news.dial.pipex.com...
We use RH8 (no errata loaded, the newer errata kernels break ABI), and have
very few issues with SCO binaries (statically linked) under Linux.
Steer away from Microsoft a.out binaries however, as they will not work.
Just need to make sure that the modules are inserted (as Stuart said). You
should be able to get away with just these two lines:
modprobe binfmt_coff
modprobe abi-sco
The rest should happen automatically.
bkx
Jim Sullivan
> We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
> (fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
> have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
> control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
> indefinite future.
>
> Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
While there was an iBCSII emulator for Linux in the past, I don't know the
status of it today. I do know that exactly this type of usage, when the SCO
Shared Libraries are required, you're violating the SCO licensing agreement
and stealing their IP. While this may be what you want to do, I tend to
frown on theft.
By the way, IBM was the original FUD distributor in the computer industry
and continues to be a leader in this field to this day.
--
Jim Sullivan
Stuart J. Browne
"Jim Sullivan" <seattl...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:BdqcnQKgCLJ...@comcast.com...
iBCS and iBCS2 are both depricated. linux-abi is the current project.
bill
I love it, do you think I could skip step 4 and just take my wife out
for a really expensive dinner instead ?
Kim Petersen
>
> While there was an iBCSII emulator for Linux in the past, I don't know the
> status of it today. I do know that exactly this type of usage, when the SCO
> Shared Libraries are required, you're violating the SCO licensing agreement
> and stealing their IP. While this may be what you want to do, I tend to
> frown on theft.
It is (as pr. SCO's own licenses - *not* theft to take the shared
libraries from your old Unix (as long as its been shredded ;-)).
Alternatively you can buy a license for the shared libraries seperately
(afaik). So if you move from SCO to Linux - you should setup ABI and
copy the shared libs (just in case some app or other isn't supported on
your new OS.)
Dan Skinner
True enough. In the 60's and 70's an MIS manager couldn't get fired by
going
IBM. In the 90's and 00's the IT manager is safe with Microsoft.
Neither are/were real technological leaders but were safe and not
hesitant to tell the person with the checkbook how safe they are/were.
Now, running SCO emulation on Linux in order to support a Windows only
application. That just might get someone fired.
Regards...Dan.
Regards...Dan.
Brian Lavender
ABI for Linux so that you can run SCO binaries
http://linux-abi.sf.net
/etc/init.d ABI script
http://sourceforge.net/docman/display_doc.php?docid=10145&group_id=13130
Works well with RH 8 out of the box. I heard they broke ABI on some
kernel updates, so be careful applying the kernel updates.
brian
Walter Haslbeck
> Anyone here have any experience running SCO apps under emulation ?
Some years ago (before Informix provided Linux binaries) I ran Informix
Online 5 (+ ISQL + STAR) without any troubles (but I didn't managed it
to make I4GL work.). That was with kernels from the 1.2 and 2.0 series,
I never tried the SCO emulation with newer kernels.
Walter
Stuart Marshall
> Works well with RH 8 out of the box. I heard they broke ABI on some
> kernel updates, so be careful applying the kernel updates.
They certainly did; IIRC (and its been a while) the one shipped with
RH8 is fine, but all of the subsequent kernel updates from RH had
ABI broken - and then they pulled it from RH9 completely (still
don't know why - maybe the SCO lawsuit contributed?!).
However, there are patches for 2.4.20 (and 21 though I've got tried
this yet) from http://linux-abi.sourceforge.net/patches/
These need to be patched onto a vanilla kernel though, rather than
the RH supplied one -- what the differences are I'm not sure...
I prefer a cleaner kernel anyway - and I've had 2.4.20 running
perfectly with ABI for a few months now.
Regards,
Stuart.
Bruce D. Collins
under Linux using a commercial product such as vmware. I use this solution
myself to support the few remaining openserver accounts I have.
The drawback to this approach is that you have to first purchase a copy of
vmware and you must have a licensed copy of openserver. I would be remiss
if I didn't mention that installing openserver under vmware is a real pain
in the ass and is not an officially supported vmware operating system. You
can find more information at www.vmware.com.
This solution works flawlessly for me. Your milage may vary.
Regards,
Bruce Collins
For my real e-mail address replace the two with a 2
Nucleon
> We have an application that was compiled for SCO but because of the FUD
> (fear, uncertainty, and doubt - a technique pioneered by MicroShaft)
> have been requested to explore moving to a Linux server. We do not
> control the application, nor can we get the vendor to port it for the
> indefinite future.
>
> Is there a generally available (GPI) emulator for SCO running on Linux ?
If the app in question has been ported to Windows, and you can get that
version cheaply enough, you could try using WINE, a userspace hack that
lets you run Windows binaries on x86 Linux. Of course, a native Linux
solution would still be the best bet.
--
Nucleon, <tcfe...@mtco.com>
<http://vlevel.sourceforge.net> - Stop fiddling with the volume knob.
Curiosity was framed; ignorance killed the cat.
Marc Champagne
news:3f5bf57e$1...@dnews.tpgi.com.au:
Uhm... Then I suppose my trying to get ABI to work for the
following is somewhat fruitless.
These are currently running on an SCO 505 box:
- Microsoft a.out separate pure segmented word-swapped 386
executable
- Microsoft a.out separate pure segmented word-swapped
pre-SysV 286 executable Large Text Large Data
- iAPX 386 COFF demand-paged executable
....you popped my balloons! :(
Stuart J. Browne
> Uhm... Then I suppose my trying to get ABI to work for the
> following is somewhat fruitless.
>
> These are currently running on an SCO 505 box:
>
> - Microsoft a.out separate pure segmented word-swapped 386
> executable
>
> - Microsoft a.out separate pure segmented word-swapped
> pre-SysV 286 executable Large Text Large Data
>
> - iAPX 386 COFF demand-paged executable
>
>
> ....you popped my balloons! :(
>
*hide* the last one will work! :P
Sorry. We have an application of which is using 'Microsoft a.out'
binaries, and after a number of hours, had no luck.
My only suggestion is "try it". It will eithe work, or it won't. It
should only take you an hour to set up a 'test' machine (find the old
desktop PC you dun need for a few days, build it up!).
bkx
Marc Champagne
>
>> Uhm... Then I suppose my trying to get ABI to work for the
>> following is somewhat fruitless.
>>
>> These are currently running on an SCO 505 box:
>>
>> - Microsoft a.out separate pure segmented word-swapped 386
>> executable
>>
>> - Microsoft a.out separate pure segmented word-swapped
>> pre-SysV 286 executable Large Text Large Data
>>
>> - iAPX 386 COFF demand-paged executable
>>
>>
>> ....you popped my balloons! :(
>>
>
> *hide* the last one will work! :P
Yeah well, the last one I don't care if it works, the first 2
are the important ones :(
As you can probably guess, the first 2 are from the xenix
days!
> Sorry. We have an application of which is using 'Microsoft
> a.out' binaries, and after a number of hours, had no luck.
Were they executing at all?
> My only suggestion is "try it". It will eithe work, or it
> won't. It should only take you an hour to set up a 'test'
> machine (find the old desktop PC you dun need for a few
> days, build it up!).
Will do!
Thanks
Marc