Re: Wine

[Brederlow <goswin.brederlow@student.uni-tuebingen.de>]

Christopher C Chimelis <chris@beezer.med.miami.edu> writes:

> On 14 Apr 1999, Brederlow wrote:
> 
> > There is a very good answere to the question "Why wine for alpha?":
> > 
> > 1. I don`t have a Windows System.
> > 2. I wan`t to use Windows progs.
> > 3. I don`t have time, money and space for an pc + keyboard + mouse +
> >    monitor.
> 
> Hmmm...well, if you're willing to deal with the speed trade-off
> (basically, it's going to be AWFULLY slow...like you're on a 386 at

Don't tell me, I'm using bochs on my alpha to emulate a complete 386.

> times), then it might be a worthwhile experiment.  Bear in mind that for
> every MFC or Windows API call, you'll be going through these steps:
> 	1. Translation of the instructions into a Linux-doable call (Wine)
> 	2. Translation of that Linux call to i386 instruction sets (Wine)
> 	3. Translation of Wine i386 instructions for Alpha Linux (em86)
> 	4. Translation of instrs from Wine's translations to Alpha Linux
> 	   (em86)
> 	5. Translation of the translations from pretty much all of the
> 	   above to Alpha instruction sets (em86/kernel)

Why so many steps? Only the nativ program code should be emulated as
i386 code and be real slow. As soon as a win api call is detected, the 
wine should be able to switch to native alpha code and run it
FAAAST. So after step 1. above, you would have some X calls and be
done with.

Since we have the source fo wine and its lib, what we now need is an
emulator that maps the i386 win api calls to a native alpha wine
lib. Thats the point where an emulator should become useable.

> > Actually I have several comps and several monitors and the space
> > requirements realy suck. Using one monitor and one keyboard is a great 
> > plus.
> 
> I used to have one of those super-neat switches that allow you to run a
> bunch of machines with just one keyboard, mouse, and monitor, but I lost
> it.  I'll tell you, though, it was a really worthwhile investment (I have
> five computers currently at home and four at work).

Yes, such a switch is pretty handy, but those are quite expensive and
the cheaper once have poor quality. Its easier to use remote displays
with X and telnets.

May the Source be with you.
			Goswin