> I wonder, if Fuzix is sufficiently portable to run on 8086, could it > happen to offer a possibly even more suitable foundation for a usable > system, than the linux-derived code in ELKS? I'm not sure where the changeover point would be. ELKS supports asynchronous disk I/O properly, something FUZIX avoids. On an 8bit micro its pretty much pure overhead. On a PC/XT it's less clear. > > plenty of stuff in ELKS that was taken from 386 Linux and is perhaps > > somewhat over-engineered for the job (buffer cache is perhaps one bit > > still) > > I guess so. Sigh. The original V7's or even V6's quite basic design might > possibly suit 8086 better (I did not look at the ELKS kernel but I saw > V6/7 sources and also pieces of Venix/86 kernel which were apparently > build from literally the same C code, this seemed to work well). ELKS is not that bloated to be honest. It's got a few areas that would probably save a chunk of memory if fixed but the basic architecture is pretty sound including basic 286 mode support. Some of the utilities are a bit brain-dead or buggy and might benefit from being pulled from elsewhere instead, and there are things lacking (like the real bourne shell should fit fine and is nowdays available) Alan -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-8086" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
