Open morganrallen opened 10 years ago
iefserge
commented
10 years ago Right now it's x86_64 only because it's simpler to support just one architecture and we can run it on most servers. It would be awesome to support ARM too, but this requires additional work.
rektide
commented
10 years ago @morganrallen can you post your WIP branch? I'd love to get a head-start seeing how far this is to working.
Competing with OSv (but with JavaScript) is cool, but there's a ton of embedded platforms badly needing friendly modern web-centric technology bases that need something like runtime.js stat.
iefserge
commented
10 years ago @rektide Yea, I think it would be cool to run this on embedded platforms, but this requires a lot of work and I'm only able to work on this project in my spare time.
MrNice
commented
9 years ago It would be awesome to be able to run this as an OS on a raspberry pi. That being said, I'm not in a position to make it so :'(
I'm currently working on an experiment that I'm calling "full stack javascript," where I'm trying to build hardware + servers + apps using nothing but JavaScript, and being able to get closer to the silicon would help with that.
It appears the primary reason to only target x86_64 is to use Docker as a development tool. While I've only started digging in it appears the deps can mostly be built for ARM. *ACPCIA Used an x86 specific call (
wbinvd) which I just changed tonopWith just the one change to the code I can get about 84% (very scientific finding) of the code to build. The only other changes are to SConstruct and ./deps/SConstruct in regards to target process and some includes.
So guess this is a question of why only target x86_64? This is great for cloud computing but I am personally interested in exploring something like Runtime on mobile.