Jeremy C. Reed wrote:
> Keep all the empty ports -- just as a reminder for people to send in their
> additions.
Fine.

> Use vertical lists for the individual apps -- this will make it easier to
> read (even though the page will get a lot longer).
Done.

> Another suggestion: add links to webpages, technical articles, etc. for
> writing and understanding emulation and/or compatibility procedures.
> (Sorry I don't know of any, so this is why I am asking.)

> Also, maybe an addition: I use BSD/OS-compiled Netscape.
I had that on the page as BSDI-netscape, but BSD/OS vs BSDI...
well, matter of taste.

Hubert Feyrer wrote:
> Maybe you can work in some details from
> http://www.feyrer.de/NetBSD/AFAQ/FAQ.html#SEC93 in the 'how it works'
> section, mentioning the issues with exec formats, and that the problem is
> not the syscall table itself, but the way that different OSs pass
> arguments different (which register, or on stack, ...).

Excellent point, I missed the exec format completely. Fixed.

Claus Andersen wrote:
> I would definitely prefer tables. I have tossed up an example 
> which partly uses an image for easier reading. 

I like the images, but the tables are all going to be quite
sparse. Many applications are only available for one arch, and
many archs don't have any emulations (or will have a unique one).

Also, the images are a lot more work to maintain. Anything which
discourages updating the pages 'on a whim' is a bad thing...

> I have not changed the text in any way but we should perhaps explain that
> Linux x86 binaries only work on the x86 architecture and so forth.

That's already mentioned in the last paragraph of 'How does it work'
and the first one of 'Any other considerations?'

> My suggestion: http://www.ntwork.dk/compat.html

I am going to steal the filename though ;-)

Yuji Yamano wrote:
> Please add perforce to the application list. Perforce for FreeBSD works
> on NetBSD/i386. Please see http://www.perforce.com/perforce/loadprog.html

Done.

> And I think it's better to make the list of major applications that
> doesn't work with binary emulation.

I've added a section for that. I think it's useful both to say
"This is known to work" and "That is known not to work".

-- 
David Maxwell, david@vex.net|david@maxwell.net -->
Any sufficiently advanced Common Sense will seem like magic... 
					      - me