4 ms·

s/proprietary// While I like non-proprietary software, there is nothing inherit that makes much of a difference for the lay person. As the complexity of the so

s/proprietary// While I like non-proprietary software, there is nothing inherit that makes much of a difference for the lay person. As the complexity of the software goes up, so does the level of what is considered a 'lay person'. For any sufficiently complex software and non-pervasive problem - you're SOL in both cases. Standards help more than proprietary/non-proprietary. Lower complexity also helps more.

dalke 13y ago
For example, if you had your own compiler which generated a.out output, then the Linux 1.2 switch to ELF would have broken the code in a similar backward incompatible way, despite there being no proprietary code involved. (Standards wouldn't have helped either.)
- markrages 13y ago
  Uh. # modprobe binfmt_aout # uname -rv 3.2.0-60-generic-pae #91-Ubuntu SMP Wed Feb 19 04:14:56 UTC 2014 Standards help a lot, that's why a.out still works on modern Linux.
- pbhjpbhj 13y ago
  I'd imagine if it doesn't work though, in contrast to the OP's situation, you could spin up a virtual machine with a pre-1.2 version of Linux and run the code without having to pay anything to do so. Also this is a quite different situation to reading a document.
  - voltagex_ 13y ago
    I'm having trouble locating a (floppy?) image that old but I'd love to try - AFAICT VirtualBox was written with kernel 2.6+ in mind. Edit: Debian: http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/Debian-0.93R6/disks/ http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/Debian-0.93R6/disks/ RedHat: http://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/1.0/en/os/i386/rootdisks/ http://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/1.0/en/o...
- npsimons 13y ago
  I'm calling your bluff: https://plus.google.com/115250422803614415116/posts/hMT5kW8LKJk https://plus.google.com/115250422803614415116/posts/hMT5kW8L... Specifically, Alan Cox's comment that he can still run an a.out rogue binary from 1992 on a 3.6 version of the Linux kernel. Linux 1.2 was released March 1995.
  - dalke 13y ago
    Bluff called, I fold .. and sweet! Looking around, it requires a bit of work (see for example http://www.ru.j-npcs.org/usoft/WWW/www_debian.org/FAQ/debian-faq-4.html http://www.ru.j-npcs.org/usoft/WWW/www_debian.org/FAQ/debian... ). Here's a recent (2014) report of success: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/running-old-a-out-binaries-on-slackware64-current-4175493511/ http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/running... rogue is text only. According to a report from 2009 at https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/linux-binary-compatibility.html https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/linux-binary-compati... : > A Mosaic binary from 1994 just segfaults, as well as all the other ZMAGIC binaries (1994-1995) I have lying around. but OTOH that may be because of the setting of noexec and other flags.

dalke 13y ago

For example, if you had your own compiler which generated a.out output, then the Linux 1.2 switch to ELF would have broken the code in a similar backward incompatible way, despite there being no proprietary code involved. (Standards wouldn't have helped either.)

markrages 13y ago
Uh. # modprobe binfmt_aout # uname -rv 3.2.0-60-generic-pae #91-Ubuntu SMP Wed Feb 19 04:14:56 UTC 2014 Standards help a lot, that's why a.out still works on modern Linux.
pbhjpbhj 13y ago
I'd imagine if it doesn't work though, in contrast to the OP's situation, you could spin up a virtual machine with a pre-1.2 version of Linux and run the code without having to pay anything to do so. Also this is a quite different situation to reading a document.
- voltagex_ 13y ago
  I'm having trouble locating a (floppy?) image that old but I'd love to try - AFAICT VirtualBox was written with kernel 2.6+ in mind. Edit: Debian: http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/Debian-0.93R6/disks/ http://archive.debian.org/debian/dists/Debian-0.93R6/disks/ RedHat: http://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/1.0/en/os/i386/rootdisks/ http://archive.download.redhat.com/pub/redhat/linux/1.0/en/o...
npsimons 13y ago
I'm calling your bluff: https://plus.google.com/115250422803614415116/posts/hMT5kW8LKJk https://plus.google.com/115250422803614415116/posts/hMT5kW8L... Specifically, Alan Cox's comment that he can still run an a.out rogue binary from 1992 on a 3.6 version of the Linux kernel. Linux 1.2 was released March 1995.
- dalke 13y ago
  Bluff called, I fold .. and sweet! Looking around, it requires a bit of work (see for example http://www.ru.j-npcs.org/usoft/WWW/www_debian.org/FAQ/debian-faq-4.html http://www.ru.j-npcs.org/usoft/WWW/www_debian.org/FAQ/debian... ). Here's a recent (2014) report of success: http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/running-old-a-out-binaries-on-slackware64-current-4175493511/ http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/slackware-14/running... rogue is text only. According to a report from 2009 at https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/linux-binary-compatibility.html https://www.complang.tuwien.ac.at/anton/linux-binary-compati... : > A Mosaic binary from 1994 just segfaults, as well as all the other ZMAGIC binaries (1994-1995) I have lying around. but OTOH that may be because of the setting of noexec and other flags.