flat assembler
Message board for the users of flat assembler.
 Home   FAQ   Search   Register 
 Profile   Log in to check your private messages   Log in 
flat assembler > Unix > Why Linux != Unix ?

Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3
Author
Thread Post new topic Reply to topic
LocoDelAssembly
Your code has a bug


Joined: 06 May 2005
Posts: 4634
Location: Argentina

Yesterday I forgot to post a link to the feature request that nVidia made for FreeBSD people.

NVIDIA FreeBSD kernel feature requests (At the foot there is a summary if you don't want to read all)

If the nVidia drivers were open, such request would be unneeded or the kernel is really lacking of means for some features that doesn't look really extraordinaire?
Post 13 Nov 2007, 16:07
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Chewy509



Joined: 19 Jun 2003
Posts: 297
Location: Bris-vegas, Australia


LocoDelAssembly wrote:
If the nVidia drivers were open, such request would be unneeded or the kernel is really lacking of means for some features that doesn't look really extraordinaire?


Some of the problems do lay with nVidia, especially since the nVidia X driver doesn't use DRI or the currently available kernel drm drivers (which the open source X drivers do).

However those issues/proposals raised are also extremely helpful with other drivers as well, so it's in the overall long term benefit to implement those requests made by nVidia...

eg. like the ability to cleaning handle devices limited to 32bit DMA address ranges, on 64bit architectures or systems with more than 4GB of RAM.

PS. Is FreeBSD 7.0 implementing X.org 7.2 or 7.3?
Post 14 Nov 2007, 00:11
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Reply with quote
drhowarddrfine



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 535

It's running 7.3 right now.
Post 14 Nov 2007, 02:17
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
vid
Verbosity in development


Joined: 05 Sep 2003
Posts: 7109
Location: Slovakia

Loco: kernel is really lacking of means for some features that doesn't look really extraordinaire. They need to set precise type of memory cache, but BSD doesn't provide way to specify cache of memory.

For that reason MS has beautiful MmAllocateContigousMemorySpecifyCache()
Post 14 Nov 2007, 02:46
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website AIM Address MSN Messenger ICQ Number Reply with quote
drhowarddrfine



Joined: 10 Jul 2007
Posts: 535

configmalloc?
Post 14 Nov 2007, 05:39
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
TheRaven



Joined: 22 Apr 2008
Posts: 77
Location: U.S.A.


m wrote:
So if we separate them based on kernels, I wonder if we have to
make a thread for Win95, Win98, WinNT, WinXP and Vista each...



Technically: Win95 and Win98 were 32 bit protected mode DOS using FAT.
WinNT was true 32 bit protected and utilized NTFS
WinXP, Vista, 7 and 8 all possess 32 bit and 64 bit with x86_64 Wow compatibility layers (except XP*) to sequentially upgraded kernels and NTFS.

*XP 32 and 64 bit were strictly 32 or 64 bit if I'm not mistaken.

Linux uses a dos format.

UNIX style BSD systems use C calling styles. System interrupt with all arguments on the stack.

LINUX is nothing like UNIX contrary to popular belief, if it's comparable to anything it would be Win98 interfacing wrapping a 32/64 bit protected mode kernel.

BSD originally based on UNIX has evolved considerably, but still behaves like UNIX.

Conclusion: Microsoft Windows is Windows, Linux is Linux and UNIX is UNIX.

Just because the GNU project wrapped their brand around UNIX tools like VIM porting them over to Linux does not make Linux Unix. Lots o' free books out there on UNIX system design and theory -- read one.

It is never too late for wisdom.

_________________
Nothing is so sought after and often avoided as the truth.
Post 15 Jan 2015, 08:53
View user's profile Send private message Reply with quote
Display posts from previous:
Post new topic Reply to topic

Jump to:  
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3

< Last Thread | Next Thread >

Forum Rules:
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001-2005 phpBB Group.

Main index   Download   Documentation   Examples   Message board
Copyright © 2004-2017, Tomasz Grysztar.