Re: Randy's inherent hate of Apple IIs

[tim.thomson@softhome.net (Tim Thomson)]

On Mon, 12 Jan 1998 13:50:02 GMT, Will Smith <wsmith@NOSPAM.ctron.com> wrote:
>On 12 Jan 1998 04:12:24 GMT, shack@onyx.southwind.net (Randy
>Shackelford) wrote:
>
>|>You can always prove me wrong by writing a C compiler that you can use
>|>to compile Linux on an Apple //e. When can we expect to see it?
>
>...and it should generate executable binaries that should run
>standalone...  :)
>
>|>Originally, you said that Linux has a better design for using differnet 
>|>file systems. And I said well why isn't there Linux on Apple IIs? That's
>|>how this crap got started. You haven't answered the question why Linux
>|>isn't available. And a hand coded lookalike doesn't count. If you think
>|>Linux is the thing to have, come up with a way to get it to run on an
>|>Apple II. If you can.
>
>-I- actually love Linux.  unforunately, i don't see it running on a
>//e simply because Linux is (at minimum) a 32-bit OS.  that's why
>Linux won't run on any 286 machines.  (so says the Linux FAQ.)
>
>until a better unix work-alike comes around, it looks like we're
>"stuck" with GNO/ME.  i haven't seen it myself, but if it's anything
>like the dox say it is, then it's worth having.

Actually, Linux is planned to be ported to the 6502.

The ELKS (Embedded Linux Kernel Subset) is at the moment only working on
8086 and 80286 processors, but ports for Z80, 680x0, 683xx, MIPS R4xxx and
6502 are coming one day.

Go to http://www.linux.org.uk/ELKS-Home/index.html to find out more!

It'll be awhile, but it's coming (hopefully  ;-)

-Tim.

---
Debian/GNU Linux... the maintainable operating system. http://www.debian.org