Re[4]: two co-existing projects

[bao.ha@srs.gov]

> >>>>> "BH" == bao ha <bao.ha@srs.gov> writes:
> 
> BH> MacIvory communicates with the MacIntosh via an RPC mechanism for
> BH> low-level I/O services.  LispOS can certainly communicate with the
> BH> host OS, Linux, via a more efficient low-level I/O services.  I
> BH> would like to login to my Linux machine, start a Genera-like
> BH> process, and get my X-Windows Genera-like screen.  Maybe not
> BH> everything has to be Genera-like, but at least all of the
> BH> functionality that my 6-year-old MacIvory 3 technology has been
> BH> provided.
> 
> This idea still seems to me to be a good tradeoff between what is
> possible, what is desirable, and what is needed in order to have a
> usable system during development.  I think this approach could be be
> especially flexible with a microkernel Unix (e.g. MkLinux and Hurd).
> 

Yes, it is a tradeoff between performance and schedule.  By using a
capable host OS, Linux or Free/NetBSD, we can concentrate on the
functionality of the Lisp World.  The low-level glue should be
abstracted at a level high enough so that the LispOS can be ported
with a minimum pain to another hardware platform, or even to Windows.
And hopefully, the LispOS can be brought to life sooner than if it has
to be started from scratch.

If a microkernel Unix is more desirable, go for it.  I will plunge
money down the PowerMac to get one that can run MkLinux.

> Maybe I'm the only one that has never used Genera, or for that matter
> any Lisp Machine, but I know any technical documentation, old source
> code, or design papers would be a welcome resource.
> 
    
Genera has on-line documentation and lisp sources.  The only problem
is that it is a commercial product.  Anybody wants to approach
Symbolics?

Bao