[Oberon] Oberon-1 or Oberon-2? (eas lab)

[skulski at pas.rochester.edu]

Chris:
> I supose:
> = all x86:win7 programs run on 64BitWinTel ?

The rule is "all except the one that you need the most". For example,
coLinux runs on 32-bit Win7, but not on 64-bit Win7. I know that coLinux
is special, but then every nontrivial program can be special. One has to
check whether "the program that one needs the most" runs or not. I was
pleased to find that Oberon System behaves itself.

> Hasn't it got the V4:compiler [with it's *.Mod] included?

Yes, but that was not my question. I would like to see one of the mature
Oberon Systems running on the RISC5. There are pieces of the mature
Systems, like Kepler, which would not compile. Do we need Kepler? Perhaps
we can live without it. Can we live without HTTP, web integration, and all
the contributions that Linz has made? Sure we can. But this makes
absolutely no sense, if one wants to take N.Wirth work as a basis for a
serious project. We just need a solid starting base. Linz V4 is such a
base. Hence, I am asking how far we are from being able to compile Linz V4
for RISC5?

I emphasize Linz V4 because in my experience it has always been very solid
and stable. System 3 is visionary and therefore a bit perplexing to use.
But in fact both should be able to run on RISC5.

Is it now more clear what I am trying to convey?

Regards,
Wojtek