Subject: Re: Linux/SCO From: rmk@rmkhome.UUCP (Rick Kelly) Date: Sat, 31 Jul 1993 02:12:45 GMT
In article <1993Jul28.181223.11097@taylor.uucp> mark@taylor.uucp (Mark A. Davis) writes:
>michaelw@desaster.hanse.de (Michael Will) writes:
>
>>mark@taylor.uucp (Mark A. Davis) writes:
>>>But why would you want to do that??? The only reason people want SCO
>>>compatibility under Linux is for commercial applications.... There is
>>>no application under Linux that can't be had for SCO Unix.
>
>>Oh yes, there is:
>
>>ObjectBuilder from ParcPlace is free for Linux but would cost a great deal
>>of money if you would have to buy it for SCO :-)
>
>Ok, so I'll count 1.
ObjectBuilder is included with SCO ODT 3.0.
>>The other way round, elf-binaries for Linux, was tackled by some guys on
>>the net, but then they seemed to fade away...?
>
>I hope not.... I still think it is the only quick way to 1000's of
>commercial applications :( It could throw Linux into mainstream....
>Imagine, a Unix OS with LOTS of commercial apps compatible for $0
Since there are more SCO UNIX systems than any other UNIX system, most
commercial UNIX applications are COFF binaries. There are thousands of
COFF applications, and maybe hundreds of ELF binaries.
Also, SVR4 supports XENIX binaries, which are neither COFF or ELF.
Give LINUX COFF compatibility, and you've opened the biggest window.
--Rick Kelly rmk%rmkhome@merk.com merk!rmkhome!rmk rmk@frog.UUCP