Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by on Thursday April 20 2017, @10:46AM   Printer-friendly
from the breaking-news dept.

Submitted via IRC for TheMightyBuzzard

Or 2018 if you're brave. For now, we have a boot screen!

Story's a bit dated but being as they're in no rush, I don't see any need for us to be either. So, you lot think we'll ever actually get to play with a VMS box on cheap hardware or is this going to be another DNF situation?

Source: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2016/10/13/openvms_moves_slowly_towards_x86/

Previous coverage:
OpenVMS Not Yet Dead.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 21 2017, @09:07AM (1 child)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday April 21 2017, @09:07AM (#497312)

    I think parent is mistaken:
    https://www.virtualbox.org/manual/ch10.html#idm9820 [virtualbox.org]

    For guest code in ring 0, VirtualBox employs a nasty trick: it actually reconfigures the guest so that its ring-0 code is run in ring 1 instead (which is normally not used in x86 operating systems). As a result, when guest ring-0 code (actually running in ring 1) such as a guest device driver attempts to write to an I/O register or execute a privileged instruction, the VirtualBox hypervisor in "real" ring 0 can take over.

  • (Score: 2) by TheRaven on Friday April 21 2017, @01:53PM

    by TheRaven (270) on Friday April 21 2017, @01:53PM (#497395) Journal
    Xen does the same trick, but only on i386. It isn't possible for x86-64.
    --
    sudo mod me up