this post was submitted on 25 Jan 2024
923 points (98.3% liked)

Programmer Humor

32588 readers
1130 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago) (1 children)

Yes, but it doesn't count, because the SoC from the picture didn't boot Linux, an emulated machine did.

That's why the records on doing this silly stuff on progressively smaller microcontroller use the word "run". It has more transitivity.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I'm not sure I understand your argument. Are you saying that the emulated processor executes instructions while the SoC doesn't? Every instruction that goes to the x86 is broken down into several SoC instructions, which the SoC executes in order to emulate what an x86 would do. Saying that the emulated x86 is booting/running Linux, but the SoC is not is like saying that computers can't run java code, they can only run jvm.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 10 months ago

I'm saying it runs it because "running" is transitive, but doesn't boot it because "booting" is not. Similarly to how you can carry your grandkid by carrying your kid who carries their kid (carrying is transitive), but you can't give birth to your grandkid by giving birth to your kid who'd give birth to their kid (giving birth is not transitive).