 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Fabrice Bellard, head of funky projects like FFmpeg and QEMU, wrote a
486 emulator in javascript and put a simplified Linux to run on it.
Check it out, if you have latest version of Firefox or Chrome at least:
http://bellard.org/jslinux
what I really want is to run Firefox on it and put it to run the
emulator... LOL
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 5/17/2011 15:22, nemesis wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard, head of funky projects like FFmpeg and QEMU, wrote a 486
I have been trying to figure out how fast it is compared to a modern
computer. If you're playing with it anyway (I don't have an appropriate
browser installed), let me know if you do any performance comparisons?
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
"Coding without comments is like
driving without turn signals."
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17/05/2011 23:22, nemesis wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard, head of funky projects like FFmpeg and QEMU, wrote a
> 486 emulator in javascript and put a simplified Linux to run on it.
> Check it out, if you have latest version of Firefox or Chrome at least:
OK, well it makes Firefox 4.0 swallow about 150MB of RAM, but it seems
to run at about the same speed as a typical Linux live CD. And there's
apparently a C compiler there, so...
One has to ask though, WHY WOULD YOU DO THIS?!?! >_<
> what I really want is to run Firefox on it and put it to run the
> emulator... LOL
~ # cat /proc/version
Linux version 2.6.20 (bellard@voyager) (gcc version 3.4.6 20060404 (Red
Hat 3.4.6-9)) #3 Sat May 14 19:08:30 CEST 2011
~ # cat /proc/meminfo
MemTotal: 30448 kB
MemFree: 26768 kB
Buffers: 2048 kB
Cached: 688 kB
SwapCached: 0 kB
Active: 2856 kB
Inactive: 76 kB
SwapTotal: 0 kB
SwapFree: 0 kB
Dirty: 4 kB
Writeback: 0 kB
AnonPages: 208 kB
Mapped: 328 kB
Slab: 664 kB
SReclaimable: 128 kB
SUnreclaim: 536 kB
PageTables: 36 kB
NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
Bounce: 0 kB
CommitLimit: 15224 kB
Committed_AS: 448 kB
VmallocTotal: 1007592 kB
MemTotal: 30448 kB
MemFree: 26768 kB
Buffers: 2048 kB
Cached: 688 kB
SwapCached: 0 kB
Active: 2856 kB
Inactive: 76 kB
SwapTotal: 0 kB
SwapFree: 0 kB
Dirty: 4 kB
Writeback: 0 kB
AnonPages: 208 kB
Mapped: 328 kB
Slab: 664 kB
SReclaimable: 128 kB
SUnreclaim: 536 kB
PageTables: 36 kB
NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
Bounce: 0 kB
CommitLimit: 15224 kB
Committed_AS: 448 kB
VmallocTotal: 1007592 kB
VmallocUsed: 0 kB
VmallocChunk: 1007592 kB
HugePages_Total: 0
HugePages_Free: 0
HugePages_Rsvd: 0
Hugepagesize: 4096 kB
VmallocUsed: 0 kB
VmallocChunk: 1007592 kB
HugePages_Total: 0
HugePages_Free: 0
HugePages_Rsvd: 0
Hugepagesize: 4096 kB
~ #
Heh, I think you'll have fun compiling X (never mind Firefox) in a
piffling 30MB of RAM. Maybe try Lynx instead? ;-)
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17/05/2011 23:22, nemesis wrote:
> Fabrice Bellard, head of funky projects like FFmpeg and QEMU, wrote a
> 486 emulator in javascript and put a simplified Linux to run on it.
My mind is still blown by this. The author casually chats about it as if
emulating something as over-complicated as an IA32 CPU is in some way
"easy".
Apparently the reason it requires a modern browser is that it uses
"typed arrays", a newish JS feature that let you manipulate arbitrary
binary data in memory (somewhat) efficiently. The Linux distro is
apparently BusyBox, together with a toy C99 compiler written by the
author of the emulator.
His other projects include an online scientific calculator with graphing
mode...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18/05/2011 09:58, Invisible wrote:
>> what I really want is to run Firefox on it and put it to run the
>> emulator... LOL
>
> ~ # cat /proc/meminfo
> MemTotal: 30448 kB
>
> Heh, I think you'll have fun compiling X (never mind Firefox) in a
> piffling 30MB of RAM. Maybe try Lynx instead? ;-)
You could probably compile QEMU and run it.
For that matter, it should be fairly trivial to run QEMU inside QEMU
inside QEMU, so...
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New escreveu:
> On 5/17/2011 15:22, nemesis wrote:
>> Fabrice Bellard, head of funky projects like FFmpeg and QEMU, wrote a 486
>
> I have been trying to figure out how fast it is compared to a modern
> computer. If you're playing with it anyway (I don't have an appropriate
> browser installed), let me know if you do any performance comparisons?
sadly, it doesn't run in my android nor I have up-to-date versions at
home or work. Some guys were able to run even emacs on it... LOL
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible escreveu:
> On 17/05/2011 23:22, nemesis wrote:
>> Fabrice Bellard, head of funky projects like FFmpeg and QEMU, wrote a
>> 486 emulator in javascript and put a simplified Linux to run on it.
>
> My mind is still blown by this. The author casually chats about it as if
> emulating something as over-complicated as an IA32 CPU is in some way
> "easy".
>
> Apparently the reason it requires a modern browser is that it uses
> "typed arrays", a newish JS feature that let you manipulate arbitrary
> binary data in memory (somewhat) efficiently. The Linux distro is
> apparently BusyBox, together with a toy C99 compiler written by the
> author of the emulator.
>
> His other projects include an online scientific calculator with graphing
> mode...
a REAL MACHO PROGRAMMER, in other words. I think he's only missing a
GPU pathtracer like everyone is doing these days. :)
BTW, it should be useful for cloudy-like virtualization, running Linux
apps directly from the browser... :)
--
a game sig: http://tinyurl.com/d3rxz9
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 17/05/2011 11:33 PM, Darren New wrote:
> I have been trying to figure out how fast it is compared to a modern
> computer. If you're playing with it anyway (I don't have an appropriate
> browser installed), let me know if you do any performance comparisons?
On my work PC (Core 2 Duo), it takes less than 30 seconds to open
Firefox, download the web page *and* boot the Linux kernel to a Bash
prompt. It's THAT FAST.
As I say, response times after that are about typical for a live CD.
(I.e., slightly sluggish, but not exactly what you'd call "slow".)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Wed, 18 May 2011 14:55:33 +0100, Invisible wrote:
> For that matter, it should be fairly trivial to run QEMU inside QEMU
> inside QEMU, so...
Actually, it isn't - virtualizing virtualization solutions doesn't tend
to work very well at all.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On 18/05/2011 10:04 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
> On Wed, 18 May 2011 14:55:33 +0100, Invisible wrote:
>
>> For that matter, it should be fairly trivial to run QEMU inside QEMU
>> inside QEMU, so...
>
> Actually, it isn't - virtualizing virtualization solutions doesn't tend
> to work very well at all.
QEMU doesn't use hardware virtualisation. It does software emulation
only. This is why it's trivial to do what I described.
For stuff that uses real hardware virtualisation... yeah, that tends not
to work. Although I have successfully run VirtualBox inside VMware
Workstation. (Had to tweak some options though, turning off some of the
hardware acceleration...)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
