Post a Comment
Anything that intercepts low-level calls to the OS/Platform and then converts them is technically a "emulator" and not a "port" per-say.
That said, this more in line with Wine's "emulator" (if you could call it that) more than a virtualization layer.
Explanation:
Virtualization layer would involve an entire platform "faked" to pretend to be lyonix. This instead just has its own API that can intercept and convert the ARMv5 instructions to the ARMv4 - to be exact this is what Rosetta on Mac OS X does (except bridging two different platforms).
Now if it were a 'port' it would involve re-writing the Firefox 2's high-level source code - something totally different.
Either way, the result is the same, it now works at near-full speed on ARMv4. Thank you 
Meh. I don't see why the person doing the port was able to keep their port closed-sourced. I though under the MPL, only Netscape had the right to create closed-source forks of the Mozilla code. If I were the Mozilla Corporation, I would be coming down on the originator of the RISC OS port like a ton of bricks.








