running windows mobile applications on openmoko
joe at neoturbine.net
Sun Jul 12 21:26:17 CEST 2009
On Sun, 12 Jul 2009 20:59:05 +0200
mobi phil <mobi at mobiphil.com> wrote:
> there is a bit of aggression on these email lists.... words like
> recover, shock... do not belong here.. generally they trigger worst
> words.. hope not in my case...
> first: it is about imagination. Why do you think WINE was created?
> because there was always software written for windows, that some
> people wanted to run on linux
> second: having such an abstraction layer, is good also for managers,
> who take decisions... Imagine a company buying 100 devices... you
> tell them buy linux, they can run your windows mobile applications as
> do not bother :)
> On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 8:33 PM, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra
> <rms at 1407.org>wrote:
> > > The interesting thing in doing that is to use some real missing
> > > software for the freerunner and the FOSS in general as complete
> > > and usable gps navigation system or the wanted skype client.
> > If there isn't what you want, either fix something close to it
> > or write a new program, or make a bounty to pay someone to do
> > it :)
> > I've still to recover from the shock of reading these words...
> > Rui
This discussion is fruitless anyways. WINE allows you to run x86
programs in the PE format (which is the DOS/Windows executable format,
as opposed to the ELF used by linux) and provides much of the libraries
these programs expect. It doesn't change the fact that these programs
are compiled to be run on intel-compatable opcodes, and it would take
an emulator to use programs written for windows on an ARM processor
like the freerunner.
As for something like WINE but for Windows CE, that would have a
smaller scope then the WINE project but you still have specialized
libraries for the mobile api (stuff like the mobile version of directx,
bluetooth libraries, etc). A quick googling shows that the loader will
work according to this thread, so there is hope at least.
And mobi, Nicola: virtualization requires processor support for
emulating the given architecture. This is why using qemu to emulate a
x86 is so much slower then using qemu+kvm to emulate a x86: in the
latter case the processor is doing some of the work instead of the
software. I don't know of any case of a processor virtualizing an
architecture besides itself, except for x86-64 processors virtualizing
for a x86.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.openmoko.org/pipermail/community/attachments/20090712/10fb4338/attachment.pgp
More information about the community