Unix OS for 286
Scott Philip Sable
find a Unix OS for an Intel 286 machine. I have tried a number of
OS's, including Minix (Shows Booting Minix 1.5 prompt, then garbage),
Linux (Seems to be CPU Specific. Does nothing), Xenix (Also seems to
be CPU Specific. Runs to the Insert Floppy FileSystem prompt, then
reboots the system.) I have also tried SCO Unix, which does the same
thing as Linux. (Nothing!) Please, help me out. Any responses should
be made to sc...@vulpus.atl.ga.us. Much thanks in advance.
Scott
Richard H. Lowery
I am also looking for a Unix OS for an Intel 286, if any of you have an
idea, especially if it is for anonymous ftp... Please send me information
as well... Thanx
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Richard H. Lowery | Computer Science |
| VSC Box 7684 | Valdosta State College |
| Valdosta, Ga 31698 | |
+--------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| low...@grits.valdosta.peachnet.edu |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Why did they name Word Perfect a Word Processor? |
| You've seen what a Food Processor does, right. |
+-----------------------------------------------------------------+
--
Mail System (MMDF)
Garrett D'Amore
Get yourself a copy of Coherent. It's sold by Mark Williams Company, and
comes in two flavors, v4.0 and v3.2. You won't be able to use v3.2 --
becuase it requires a 386, but v4.0 should work. MWC charges $99 for
either version, regardless of price. They do include nice documentation,
and their o.s. is much more stable (if it doesn't include as many nice
features -- like TCP/IP networking).
A few notes -- you will be limited to programs that fit in 64K of ram. You
won't be able to run X. There are probably other limitations as well. This
is because the 286 is an old cpu which doesn't have as much support for
protection and large-space addressing as the 386. Coherent 3.2 is the only
286 based version of Un*x I know of worth messing with.
On a side note: if you're going to do anything real with Unix, get yourself
a 386 or 486 and save yourself some headaches. :-)
PS: There is a group devoted to Coherent on the internet... comp.os.coherent,
I think.
====================================================================
Garrett D'Amore | gar...@haas.berkeley.edu
Software Co-Ordinator | 68 Barrows Hall, UC Berkeley
Haas Computing Services | Ph: 510-643-5923 Fax: 642-4769
====================================================================
David W. Summers
if anyone is interested.
- David Summers
(d...@engr.uark.edu)
--
"Never under-estimate the bandwidth of a station-wagon
David Summers full of tapes, hurtling down the highway."
d...@engr.uark.edu - Tanenbaum, "Computer Networks"
Dennis Cheng-Zen Yang
> comes in two flavors, v4.0 and v3.2. You won't be able to use v3.2 --
> becuase it requires a 386, but v4.0 should work. MWC charges $99 for
> protection and large-space addressing as the 386. Coherent 3.2 is the only
> 286 based version of Un*x I know of worth messing with.
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I don't understand that. Do you mean I need a 386 for v3.2 but it is
based on 286 ?
--
Dennis Cheng-Zen Yang Inter: den...@solar.csie.ntu.edu.tw
Computer System Lab. Tel : 886-2-3630231 ext 3016
Dep. of Computer Sci. and Info. Eng. ___ ___ , __ .
National Taiwan University / <__ / __> |__
<___ ___> <___ <__| |__>
--
Mail System (MMDF)
TO...@merlin.cobb.ziff.com
Hmmm...Minix works OK on my circa 1988 Zeos 286...
Tony
--
Mail System (MMDF)
Dennis Cheng-Zen Yang
> Hmmm...Minix works OK on my circa 1988 Zeos 286...
>
> Tony
>
> --
My 286 has 1M memory and 30M HD for Minix 1.5, and runs at 10 MHz.
Henrik Schultz - UNIRAS A/S Production Systems Group
going on his 286 machine:
MINIX does support 286, even in protected mode, and does that very well in
my eyes. I run on an *OLD* 6MHz AT (it has serial number 000245...)
with 3.5 Mb RAM and some other stuff, and everything works fine of course.
If you have tried 4 different UNIX'es for your 286 PC, and nothing works,
my bet is that something is wrong with YOUR machine, like the I/O chips
are different or so... Compatible isn't always the same as compatible!
Henrik
--
Mail System (MMDF)
Vijay Bajwa
Minix and Xenix should definitely work on a 286 system. Could you tell
me what machine you have ?
Vijay Bajwa
--
Mail System (MMDF)
Tom Legrady
if I am reasonably satisifed with it on _my_ old 286 system. But I
would prefer to test it out before shelling out my money.
Is there any way to try it free of charge for a limited time? perhaps
an outdated version? or a damaged version with some instructions
disabled or a limited number of startups?
Garrett D'Amore
following error:
>
>Get yourself a copy of Coherent. It's sold by Mark Williams Company, and
>comes in two flavors, v4.0 and v3.2. You won't be able to use v3.2 --
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>becuase it requires a 386, but v4.0 should work. MWC charges $99 for
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
That should be that you won't be able to run 4.0, but you should be able
to run 3.2. I haven't been getting much sleep lately -- CS classes,
programming for work, and hacking Linux have all taken their toll. :)
BTW, I own both versions and would be willing to sell them, only becuase
Linux is so Cool :). The two versions are against one license, so you
would be legally bound to run only one or the other version of the OS, at
least at the same time. (No copies on different computers.)
If you're interested, make an offer. I'd need to verify that this is legal
under MWCs license (i.e. transfer of license).
fred smith
: Get yourself a copy of Coherent. It's sold by Mark Williams Company, and
: comes in two flavors, v4.0 and v3.2. You won't be able to use v3.2 --
: becuase it requires a 386, but v4.0 should work.
This is good advice--just one problem...it's W R O N G.
Coherent version 4.x and (potentially) higher require a 386, minimum.
For a 286 you could use 3.2.1 or earlier.
Except for that little problem, though, it's good advice.
Also, you might be able to find an old copy of Xenix/286 floating
around somewhere which should also work for you. I doubt if SCO still
sells it, though.
Linux is 386-specific, unfortunately.
Fred
Tim Pierce
>Linux is 386-specific, unfortunately.
Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
students, who also generally seem to be the most enthused about PC
Unices). I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
--
____ Tim Pierce / ?Usted es la de la tele, eh? !La madre
\ / twpi...@unix.amherst.edu / del asesino! !Ay, que graciosa!
\/ (BITnet: TWPIERCE@AMHERST) / -- Pedro Almodovar
scott allen long
>In article <9304...@fcshome.UUCP> fre...@fcshome.UUCP (fred smith) writes:
>
>>Linux is 386-specific, unfortunately.
>
>Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
>are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
>students, who also generally seem to be the most enthused about PC
>Unices). I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
>any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
>
A 386sx is a drop in the bucket these days. Even a full fledged dx cpu is a
commodity. If you're willing to spend the time to look in a magazine like
Computer Shopper and maybe assemble systems yourself, a PC can be very cheap.
386DX-33 motherboard w/CPU ~$210
4 megs ram ~$135
Case and power supply ~$80
Floppy drive ~$40
VGA card ~$70
Mono VGA monitor (all you really need) ~$150
2400 baud modem ~$40
100 meg hard drive ~$225
Multi I/O card ~$15
Total: $965
You can also salvage many of these parts (vga card, floppy drive, case).
Granted, this is a minimum system, but it is very usuable. I've seen postings
about people running 386bsd on a 20MHz 386sx (price: ~$150).
-sl
TO...@merlin.cobb.ziff.com
[stuff deleted]
> I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
> any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
Hey! the 4004 is COOOOL! :)
Peter da Silva
> A 386sx is a drop in the bucket these days. Even a full fledged dx cpu is a
> commodity. If you're willing to spend the time to look in a magazine like
> Computer Shopper and maybe assemble systems yourself, a PC can be very cheap.
Even cheaper if you don't want to run X (and if you only have 4M you don't
want to run X).
> VGA card ~$70
Hercules Mono card ~$20
> Mono VGA monitor (all you really need) ~$150
Mono monitor ~$60
> Total: $855
> You can also salvage many of these parts (vga card, floppy drive, case).
My mono card cost me $7, and the monitor cost $15. I got two floppy drives
for $20 each, and 2 used ESDI hard disks for $25 apiece.
--
Peter da Silva. <pe...@sugar.neosoft.com>.
`-_-' Oletko halannut suttasi tänään?
'U`
Tarjoilija, tämä ateria elää vielä.
CSCH...@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca
*** Resending note of 04/19/93 00:07
Scott Allen Long <sco...@ENGIN.UMICH.EDU> writes:
>>Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
>>are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
>>students, who also generally seem to be the most enthused about PC
>>Unices). I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
>>any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
>>
>A 386sx is a drop in the bucket these days. Even a full fledged dx cpu is a
>commodity. If you're willing to spend the time to look in a magazine like
>Computer Shopper and maybe assemble systems yourself, a PC can be very cheap.
... <component list deleted> ...
>Total: $965
Used 386's go for approximately that price here in Victoria, sometimes less
but usually more. Most of the students I know can't afford that.
>You can also salvage many of these parts (vga card, floppy drive, case).
>Granted, this is a minimum system, but it is very usuable. I've seen postings
>about people running 386bsd on a 20MHz 386sx (price: ~$150).
I agree you can get some very good deals. I'm rather skeptical that they are
all that common. It's also been my experience that exceptionally good deals
are usually gone a few hours after they've been advertised.
Regards, Lipnet: (604)389-3827
Cy Schubert OV/VM: BCSC02(CSCHUBER)
MVS Support BITNET: CSCH...@BCSC02.BITNET
BC Systems Corp. Internet: csch...@bcsc02.gov.bc.ca
--
Mail System (MMDF)
TO...@merlin.cobb.ziff.com
CPU board. A 40mHz 386 with RAM is about $400.
George Newbury
> I am in desperate need of any and all help!!! I am currently trying to
> find a Unix OS for an Intel 286 machine.
In the Washington Post Business section today there is advertised
a 386SX40 motherboard for $99.00. If one added memory at $33.00/Mb one
could have a Linux compatible system for about $250.00, by using the parts
from the 286 system.
Klaus Guhr
: Get yourself a copy of Coherent. It's sold by Mark Williams Company, and
: comes in two flavors, v4.0 and v3.2. You won't be able to use v3.2 --
: becuase it requires a 386, but v4.0 should work. MWC charges $99 for
: either version, regardless of price. They do include nice documentation,
: and their o.s. is much more stable (if it doesn't include as many nice
: features -- like TCP/IP networking).
: A few notes -- you will be limited to programs that fit in 64K of ram. You
: won't be able to run X. There are probably other limitations as well. This
: is because the 286 is an old cpu which doesn't have as much support for
: protection and large-space addressing as the 386. Coherent 3.2 is the only
: 286 based version of Un*x I know of worth messing with.
You have forgotten SCO Xenix 286 and Minix 1.5.
--
o o
---oOO-(_)-OOo--------------------------------------------------------------
| Klaus Guhr, Marktstr.33 | Phone : +49 +228 48 53 60
k...@gnusys.GUN.de | 5300 Bonn 3, Germany | FAX/Data: +49 +228 43 24 33
| | FAX: 08.00 - 20.00 h | Data:?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
uid 0 is expired. Shutdown in 1 minute!
News reader
: comes in two flavors, v4.0 and v3.2. You won't be able to use v3.2 --
: becuase it requires a 386, but v4.0 should work. MWC charges $99 for
Not correct. ( Only a mistake, I think.)
V 4.0 needs 386 or 486
V 3.2 will run with a 286
But the rest is right:
:
: A few notes -- you will be limited to programs that fit in 64K of ram. ..
I don`t know much about 3.2, I am running 4.0 and I'm very pleased about it.
Regards
Werner
+++++++++++++++
+ Werner Heisch Danziger Strasse 13 D 6800 Mannheim 71
+ Phone (modem) +49 621 476860
+ ne...@heisch.rni.sub.org
+++++++++++++++
--
Rick Kelly
>
>>Linux is 386-specific, unfortunately.
>
>Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
>are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
>students, who also generally seem to be the most enthused about PC
>Unices). I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
>any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
But wouldn't it be fortunate if you could get Linux up and running on a
Sun 3/80 (68030) for a price much less than a 386 or 486 PC?
--
Rick Kelly rmkhome!r...@merk.com merk!rmkhome!rmk r...@frog.UUCP
william E Davidsen
| Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
| are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
| students, who also generally seem to be the most enthused about PC
| Unices). I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
| any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
The difference in cost between the 386SX and 286 is pretty small these
days. Anyone who can afford enough memory and disk for UNIX should be
able to find $50 or so more.
--
bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
Last year I worried that Bush would die and let Quayle take over.
This year I worry that Hillary will die and let Bill take over.
Steven J Sobol
: In article <C5psF...@unix.amherst.edu> twpi...@unix.amherst.edu (Tim Pierce) writes:
: >In article <9304...@fcshome.UUCP> fre...@fcshome.UUCP (fred smith) writes:
: >
: >>Linux is 386-specific, unfortunately.
: >
: >Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
: >are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
: A 386sx is a drop in the bucket these days. Even a full fledged dx cpu is a
(etc, etc)
: Granted, this is a minimum system, but it is very usuable. I've seen postings
: about people running 386bsd on a 20MHz 386sx (price: ~$150).
I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
22.5 MB for DOS/Windows3.1 (which I can run just fine, thank you), and 22.5
for Coherent. Obviously, I'm not running gcc or X11R5 on my computer, but
I can use Coherent very well...
-S.
--
steven j. sobol, head honcho, The Tiny Software Co. sjs...@tiny.com
Disclaimer: I own TSC's opinions. :)
APK Public Access Internet: telnet to ! Drown the soul, and through the eyes
wariat.org or call 216-481-9436 ! you'll see the future so cold &
(2400 baud) or 481-1960 (9600 and up) ! lonely (House of Love)
Hendrik Boom
: find a Unix OS for an Intel 286 machine. I have tried a number of
While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
--
-------------------------------------------------------
Try one or more of the following addresses to reply.
at work: hen...@vedge.com, iros1!vedge!hendrik
at home: uunet!ozrout!topoi!hendrik
Rick Miller - Linux Device Registrar
>
>I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
>22.5 MB for DOS/Windows3.1 (which I can run just fine, thank you), and 22.5
>for Coherent. Obviously, I'm not running gcc or X11R5 on my computer, but
>I can use Coherent very well...
It wasn't obvious to ME that you couldn't be running gcc. How can you say
"very well" if you can't run gcc?!? It worked fine under Linux on an even
*smaller* machine.
I had Linux on my 386SX/16 w/ 2MB RAM on a mere 20MB partition for a while
(until I scrapped MS-DOS!), and it could re-compile its own kernel while I
ran kermit (a big memory-hog, as far as comm-programs go) to post articles
to comp.os.linux!
...and you don't fool me! You can *NOT* run DOS/Windows3.1 "just fine" on
a 16 MHz processor with only 2MB of RAM, unless you're not DOING anything.
Rick Miller <ri...@ee.uwm.edu> | <ric...@discus.mil.wi.us> Ricxjo Muelisto
Send a postcard, get one back! | Enposxtigu bildkarton kaj vi ricevos alion!
RICK MILLER // 16203 WOODS // MUSKEGO, WIS. 53150 // USA
Abolghassem Salahi
>sa...@halcyon.com (Scott Philip Sable) writes:
>: I am in desperate need of any and all help!!! I am currently trying to
>: find a Unix OS for an Intel 286 machine. I have tried a number of
>While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
>PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
>Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
Not sure if if works on a 286, but it works in an 8088: Venix 2.0. It is
very old, had no TCP/IP support, no manual pages, but it had a compiler and
/bin and /usr/bin were pretty full. I had a second terminal (an old BBC
running kermit :-) attached fine , but configuring the devices for a modem
proved too much, though looking at the device names I would say it is possible.
If you want more information then ask. I did see an advert for Venix in Byte
a couple of years ago. I *think* the firm was 'Venturcom.'
Alexis
scott allen long
>sjs...@tiny.com (Steven J Sobol) writes:
>>
>>I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
>>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
>Rick Miller <ri...@ee.uwm.edu> | <ric...@discus.mil.wi.us> Ricxjo Muelisto
>Send a postcard, get one back! | Enposxtigu bildkarton kaj vi ricevos alion!
> RICK MILLER // 16203 WOODS // MUSKEGO, WIS. 53150 // USA
-sl
Peter Holzer
>While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
>PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
>Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
Minix 1.1 :-)
Even the later versions of Minix should run on it, but you may have to
remove the wini task (I think it causes trouble if it cannot find the
hard disk, even if you don't access /dev/hd*).
hp
--
| _ | Peter J. Holzer | Think of it |
| |_|_) | Technical University Vienna | as evolution |
| | | | Computer Science/Real-Time Systems | in action! |
| __/ | h...@vmars.tuwien.ac.at | Tony Rand |
Jeff Burney
>>>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
>[deleted.... "My computer is smaller than yours!"]
>You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
>just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
>What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
Oh yeah, well I'm running Unix, DOS6.0, VMS and OSF/1 simultaneously,
in different Gem windows on an Atari 800 with 48k and a 51/4" external drive.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....ahem, sorry.
--
Jeff Burney
202-606-4570 jbu...@argos.nodc.noaa.gov
Ocean Climate Lab
NOAA/National Oceanographic Data Center
Louis Giliberto
: Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
: are still out of the financial grasp of many people (most notably
: students, who also generally seem to be the most enthused about PC
: Unices). I don't find it unfortunate that Linux doesn't run on a 286
: any more than I find it unfortunate that it doesn't run on a 4004.
Not really anymore. If you have a 286, then you have all the hardware
except for the motherboard. You can get a 386/40 motherb 3 blocks from my house
for $190 (probably cheaper by mailorder or if you looked around). If you're
286 was new enough to use SIMM's, you don't even have to buy memory if
they're the right kind.
A 386 is a bit expensive for students if you have to start from scratch.
-Louis
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louis J. Giliberto, Jr. ! ma...@drktowr.chi.il.us (send here)
-sysadmin drktowr ! ma...@gagme.chi.il.us (forwards to above)
Chicago, IL USA ! lgi...@math.luc.edu (probably OK)
Home of DarkTower Software ! lgi...@orion.it.luc.edu (anal-retentive quotas)
! lgi...@mica.meddean.luc.edu (best luc.edu sys)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Try his first wife's maiden name backwards" -- Cheshire Catalyst
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Cox
>
>While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
>PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
>Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
>
The older versions of minix (certainly 1.3) would run bearably on a 640K
PC with a pair of 1.2Mb floppy disks. Not pleasant but usable by the
masochist.
Alan
Garrett D'Amore
>>
>>I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
>>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
>>22.5 MB for DOS/Windows3.1 (which I can run just fine, thank you), and 22.5
>>for Coherent. Obviously, I'm not running gcc or X11R5 on my computer, but
>>I can use Coherent very well...
>
>It wasn't obvious to ME that you couldn't be running gcc. How can you say
>"very well" if you can't run gcc?!? It worked fine under Linux on an even
>*smaller* machine.
Coherent comes with its own cc and as. You don't "need" gcc to run stuff at
all. I found that as far as cc's go, it wasn't half bad (compared to say
Sun's dog...)
>I had Linux on my 386SX/16 w/ 2MB RAM on a mere 20MB partition for a while
>(until I scrapped MS-DOS!), and it could re-compile its own kernel while I
>ran kermit (a big memory-hog, as far as comm-programs go) to post articles
>to comp.os.linux!
>
>...and you don't fool me! You can *NOT* run DOS/Windows3.1 "just fine" on
>a 16 MHz processor with only 2MB of RAM, unless you're not DOING anything.
Not true. As long as you are willing to run only one task at a time, and
you limit yourself to simple word processing and spreadsheeting, it does
just fine. (This is what most people use Windows for.)
I operate a lab with about 25 486-33s, 20 386sx-20s, a couple of 486DX2-66s,
and a bunch of Macs. I've found that the 386sx's are quite sufficient for
Windows. Of course, we have 4 Mb on these machines, but I also am usually
running several WinQVT (Telnet clone) sessions as well as a Word 2.0 session.
I have two machines on my desk -- a 386sx-20 and a 486dx-33. I run DOS/Win
on the sx, and Linux on the 486. Both work well. :)
william E Davidsen
| You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
| just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
| What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
No, change floppy disks! It adds a whole new meaning to the term
"swapping."
Marc WANDSCHNEIDER
>>>>I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
>>>>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
>>[deleted.... "My computer is smaller than yours!"]
>>You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
>>just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
>>What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
>
>Oh yeah, well I'm running Unix, DOS6.0, VMS and OSF/1 simultaneously,
>in different Gem windows on an Atari 800 with 48k and a 51/4" external drive.
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....ahem, sorry.
HA! WIMPS! ALL OF YOU!
Look at all of you with your 'powerhouse' machines.
Try running UNIX on a real machine---A Timex Sinclar 1000.
AWESOME machine. Gotta love how it refreshes the entire screen after every
character types.
Tooodlepip!
Marc [the Vic20 is just too damn fast] 'em.
TO...@merlin.cobb.ziff.com
processor beast really cycles. This week, I intend to GREP a file...
Eric Williams
: just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
: What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
Actually, people have been running multi-tasking multi-windowing
software on Radio Shack Color Computer III's with 128-256K RAM for
years. They used the OS9 operating system level 2. Too bad Microware
was never very interested in supporting hobbiest users.
--
Eric Williams wd6...@netcom.com | Never attribute to malice that which
WD6CMU@WD6CMU.#NOCAL.CA.USA.NA | is adequately explained by stupidity.
John D. Boggs
> sa...@halcyon.com (Scott Philip Sable) writes:
> : I am in desperate need of any and all help!!! I am currently trying to
> : find a Unix OS for an Intel 286 machine. I have tried a number of
>
> While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
> PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
> Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
>
Hey, I've got one of those Sharp scientific calculators (the EL-5813).
It says it's programmable, is there a Unix that'll run on it?
-John D. Boggs j...@erato.iowa-city.ia.us
or ...!access1!erato!jdb
scott allen long
Just think of the possibilities here! Someday, your stereo might be able to
multitask. Your toaster could have a 38,400 bps PPP link. Maybe even pocket
calculators will have multiple terminals! btw, I have an old Texas Instruments
99/4A computer (it was a glorified Speak and Spell, remember?). Maybe I can
port Unix and X to that......
-sl
Bert Laverman
: You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
: just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
: What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
a Unix Z80 Implementation, that tries to do just that.
It does require a hard-disk however, and since memory
restrictions induced full-swapping (a swapped process
is put on disk in its entirety, as the next one may need
all of the remaining 32K), the implementor did not do
such things as switching on disk-waits. :-)
However, the newer Z280 processor is quite capable
of running UNIX...
Bert
--
#include <std/disclaimer>
Bert Laverman, Dept. of Computing Science, Groningen University
Friendly mail to: lave...@cs.rug.nl The rest to: /dev/null
Henk de Groot
>Tim Pierce (twpi...@unix.amherst.edu) wrote:
>: Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
>except for the motherboard. You can get a 386/40 motherb 3 blocks from my house
FLAME ON
I don't understand this. The guy asked for a 286 unix and all I read is how
to upgrade to a 386. That was not the question!
I'm sick and tired of this, every time someone asks a question regarding old
hardware immediately people start saying 'its old, upgrade!' Maybe the guy
already has 3 486 66Mhz PC's and a Pentium but just wants to make use of his
old 286, or maybe a 286 is just enough for him (like it is for me). Please,
if the guy wanted to upgrade he would have asked a different question I'm
sure! Also questions about upgrading PC's don't belong in the '.os.'
groups!
FLAME OFF
To answer the question:
Minix 1.5 will run fine as a UNIX system on a 286. Of course there is an
64K+64K limit, but that's because its a 286. As far as I know every 286 Unix
has this problem. I own Minix 1.5 and I'm happy with it. Only if you need
large programs to run you have a problem but since you asked for a 286 Unix
I think you were aware of it's limitation.
There are various programs available for MINIX, and because it is a UNIX
version you can get all kinds of utilites for it (look at the archive sites
in comp.sources.unix and comp.sources.misc, most of them don't exceed the
64K+64K size. You have to have expirience with porting programs, but it is
not an impossible task)
There are also cross-compilers for MINIX so you can generate programs with
Turbo-C for minix (using a special library and the minix .h files).
I don't know about other 286 Unixes, but Minix can 'grow' with your system if
you upgrade to a 386, the updates are available on various FTP sites. Minix
is moving towards POSIX complience and development is still going on, I
don't know if other 286 Unix systems are enhanced anymore. I think most of
them are 'end of life' and replaced by 386 versions.
Note that MINIX will run on 8088 and 8086 systems too, but that was not your
question...
Kind Regards,
Henk.
P.S. Sorry for the FLAME, I cooled down now thank you.
--
/ / Henk de Groot | Dep.: IISS-SE (System Management)
/---/ __ __ / Loc: V2/A05 | Mail: gr...@idca.tds.philips.nl
/ / (-_ / / /( Tel: +31 55 432104 | Digital Equipment Corporation
Steven Fisher
|>In <93042...@drktowr.chi.il.us> ma...@drktowr.chi.il.us (Louis Giliberto) writes:
|>>Tim Pierce (twpi...@unix.amherst.edu) wrote:
|>>: Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
|>>Not really anymore. If you have a 286, then you have all the hardware
|>>except for the motherboard. You can get a 386/40 motherb 3 blocks from my house
|>
|>FLAME ON
|>I don't understand this. The guy asked for a 286 unix and all I read is how
|>to upgrade to a 386. That was not the question!
|>
|>I'm sick and tired of this, every time someone asks a question regarding old
|>hardware immediately people start saying 'its old, upgrade!' Maybe the guy
|>already has 3 486 66Mhz PC's and a Pentium but just wants to make use of his
|>old 286, or maybe a 286 is just enough for him (like it is for me). Please,
|>if the guy wanted to upgrade he would have asked a different question I'm
|>sure!
Maybe he didn't realize that he could upgrade his hardware and use a free
unix for the cost of a commercial unix.
|>Also questions about upgrading PC's don't belong in the '.os.'
|>groups!
|>FLAME OFF
|>
|>To answer the question:
|>
|>Minix 1.5 will run fine as a UNIX system on a 286. Of course there is an
|>64K+64K limit, but that's because its a 286. As far as I know every 286 Unix
|>has this problem. I own Minix 1.5 and I'm happy with it. Only if you need
|>large programs to run you have a problem but since you asked for a 286 Unix
|>I think you were aware of it's limitation.
But don't forget, Minix costs more than a new 386sx motherboard. And if he
decides that unix is not for him, at least he has a 386 now.
-steve
Tony Ennis
>>Tim Pierce (twpi...@unix.amherst.edu) wrote:
>>: Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
>>Not really anymore. If you have a 286, then you have all the hardware
>>except for the motherboard. You can get a 386/40 motherb 3 blocks from my house
>FLAME ON
>I don't understand this. The guy asked for a 286 unix and all I read is how
>to upgrade to a 386. That was not the question!
>
>I'm sick and tired of this, every time someone asks a question regarding old
>hardware immediately people start saying 'its old, upgrade!' Maybe the guy
>already has 3 486 66Mhz PC's and a Pentium but just wants to make use of his
>old 286, or maybe a 286 is just enough for him (like it is for me). Please,
>if the guy wanted to upgrade he would have asked a different question I'm
>sure! Also questions about upgrading PC's don't belong in the '.os.'
>groups!
>FLAME OFF
FLAME ON
Hey Henk, take some lithium. I do not think Tim is out of line by suggesting a cheap
upgrade to a 386. This would give the guy a lot more options on which Unix to select. Note
that the CPU upgrade costs about $300 (US) with 4MB of RAM, while MINIX costs $150 US. And
once Tim is running a 386, he can get LINUX for free, which is supposed to be a pretty good
Unix. It also would allow OS/2 and Windows, should he prefer those OSs, and all other newer
software. Not to mention a 40mHz 386 is about 5 times faster than an IBM AT, and 4 times
faster than the faster (12 mHz) 286's. All in all, I would think that Tim made an excellent
point. I could only stomach your reply if the original question had been, "I have a 286
and I will NOT consider replacing it under any circumstance. Which Unices will it run?"
I think most of us understand that the guy was wanting a Unix mostly, and would probably
appreciate any option that might help him get one. Even if it is not Minix.
And another thing, your 10 line .sig is very painful for those of us (like me) that
have 1200 baud modems. Certainly, you are not going to suggest I upgrade to something
more modern??
FLAME OFF
flames > nl:
Tony
to...@merlin.cobb.ziff.com
--
Mail System (MMDF)
Jay Maynard
>64K+64K limit, but that's because its a 286. As far as I know every 286 Unix
>has this problem. I own Minix 1.5 and I'm happy with it. Only if you need
>large programs to run you have a problem but since you asked for a 286 Unix
>I think you were aware of it's limitation.
Actually, Microport System V/AT (real SVr2 for the 286) was only limited in
that an individual data object could not be larger than 64K; neither code, nor
the aggregate of all data, was limited at all.
If you can find a copy of version 2.3, it might even be stable enough for you.
Porting the usual bunch of Unix freeware to it will be a challenge, though,
due to the number of VAXocentric programmers out there...
--
Jay Maynard, EMT-P, K5ZC, PP-ASEL | Never ascribe to malice that which can
jmay...@oac.hsc.uth.tmc.edu | adequately be explained by stupidity.
"If OS/2 is dead, then there are an awful lot of vocal ghosts calling us on
the phone." -- Katy Ansardi of Indelible Blue (an OS/2 exclusively store)
Brian Holliday
Yes. I've been running a "real AT&T" System V Release 2 UNIX on my 286 since
1987. I bought it from Microport Systems.
Brian Holliday
Pacific Bell
Peppone Zanetti
>in different Gem windows on an Atari 800 with 48k and a 51/4" external drive.
>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....ahem, sorry.
...and I'm running Unix, Windows NT, OS/2, VMS and QDOS (the OF of Sinclair QL,
full multitasking) in a ZX81 with 1k (but w/ 800 Mb of musicassette swap area).
:-)
Giuseppe
--
_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/ Giuseppe Zanetti
_/ ___ _/ be...@sabrina.dei.unipd.it
_/ _/ _/
_/ _/_/ _/_/_/_/
George Newbury
>In article <1r34ml...@uwm.edu> Rick Miller - Linux Device Registrar <ri...@ee.uwm.edu> writes:
>>sjs...@tiny.com (Steven J Sobol) writes:
>>>
>>>I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
>>>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
>[deleted.... "My computer is smaller than yours!"]
>You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
>just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
>What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
Floppy ! You got a floppy !
Real programers only use the front panel switches !
Richard Nickle
It looks quite a bit like Coherent 3.0 in what it comes with. 64k segments
for memory, and pretty much the V7 toolkits. I think it actually had a few
things Coherent 3.0 didn't (but, this was circa 1984).
The address on the manuals:
VenturCom Inc.,
215 First Street,
Cambridge MA 02142
(617) 661-1230
I believe they are still around, making embedded real-time kernels.
But I'm not sure.
Minix runs on an 8088, doesn't it?
>Alexis
--
richard nickle ri...@trystro.uucp 617-625-7155 v.32/v.42bis
think!trystro!rick somerville massachusetts
Greg Delozier
>>>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided
>
>You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
>just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
>What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
>
across from my SparcStation, on which I run Minix 1.4 with editor, compiler,
etc. The thing is, I can't use the hard drive, so I use the ram disk for
root and the 360 floppy for /usr. It works just fine, and every so often
I write a little program and run it, just to remind myself that the runaway
complexity of today's unix wasn't always there...
Funny thing is, it always impresses the Unix network administrators...
especially when I put the compile task in the background!
-greg
Gregory S. DeLozier/Senior Scientific Analyst/Loral
Will Rose
: >sjs...@tiny.com (Steven J Sobol) writes:
: >>
: >>I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
: >>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the
: >>middle.
: [deleted.... "My computer is smaller than yours!"]
I once had UZI running on a Z80 - 32K system and 32K user space - so there!
(I wiped it, alas; there's a mark II around, but I've never had the time
to find it and play with it).
Henk de Groot
>And another thing, your 10 line .sig is very painful for those of us (like me) that
>have 1200 baud modems. Certainly, you are not going to suggest I upgrade to something
>more modern??
Look again, my signatrue is only 4 lines (including the -- line, and
that's not even a part of the .signature file), pretty normal. If you
have a 1200 baud modem fine. If you were looking for a communication
package for a 1200 baud modem, would you like responces like 'buy a 2400
baud modem?'. That's just what happend to the original question. On the
layout subject: please use lines < 80 characters, it's hard to read on
an 80 character screen now and many screens are 80 characters wide.
Better use somewhere around 75 characters so it will not wrap if someone
quotes you.
Ok, this is off topic and I'm not going to respond to this thread anymore,
I said what I had to say.
Have a nice day,
Henk.
Here is my .signature, count the lines if you will:
John D. Boggs
Yeah, but if his machine's *that* old, it won't support 1.2 Meg disks.
Steven J Sobol
replied to my post --
: >I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
: >It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
: >for Coherent. Obviously, I'm not running gcc or X11R5 on my computer, but
: >I can use Coherent very well...
and he said,
: It wasn't obvious to ME that you couldn't be running gcc.
(With 2 megs of RAM? And maybe 10 megs free disk space out of 22?)
Then he goes on to say,
: How can you say
: "very well" if you can't run gcc?!? It worked fine under Linux on an even
: *smaller* machine.
well, very simply, I don't *need* gcc. And from what I understand, it needs
4-8 megs RAM to run without a severe performance degradation. And I don't want
to make the investment in memory right now, although I could use it... I
have other things to spend my money on... (bills; saving for a car that runs;
etc, etc.)
: I had Linux on my 386SX/16 w/ 2MB RAM on a mere 20MB partition for a while
: (until I scrapped MS-DOS!), and it could re-compile its own kernel while I
: ran kermit (a big memory-hog, as far as comm-programs go) to post articles
: to comp.os.linux!
Wow. I'm impressed. (not.) Exactly how much time did it spend re-compiling
the kernel? How much stuff did it swap out to disk?
: ...and you don't fool me! You can *NOT* run DOS/Windows3.1 "just fine" on
: a 16 MHz processor with only 2MB of RAM, unless you're not DOING anything.
Have you tried it? Granted, you can't run a kazillion programs at a time
but I could run my compiler and MS Word and a couple other programs at the
same time.
I don't fool you, huh? I'm sorry, I didn't realize you know everything. :)
--
steven j. sobol, head honcho, The Tiny Software Co. sjs...@tiny.com
Disclaimer: I own TSC's opinions. :)
APK Public Access Internet: telnet to ! Drown the soul, and through the eyes
wariat.org or call 216-481-9436 ! you'll see the future so cold &
(2400 baud) or 481-1960 (9600 and up) ! lonely (House of Love)
Steven J Sobol
: In article <1r34ml...@uwm.edu> Rick Miller - Linux Device Registrar <ri...@ee.uwm.edu> writes:
: >sjs...@tiny.com (Steven J Sobol) writes:
: >>
: >>It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
: You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
: just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
: What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
Do you think I want to be running on a 2/20 system running a 386/SX? NO!!!
Actually I'd like to have a Pentium. But my Gold Card application hasn't been
accepted yet... at least, they haven't sent me my card.
(Oh, by the way. Never get a bank loan for a computer. Buy outright or
lease if you can. My loan was a huge mistake... I forgot how fast computers
depreciate.)
To answer your question, I did finish "War and Peace" once during bootup. :)
Alan Cox
>I once had UZI running on a Z80 - 32K system and 32K user space - so there!
>
>(I wiped it, alas; there's a mark II around, but I've never had the time
>to find it and play with it).
>
>Will
>c...@crash.cts.com
>
I'm in the middle of getting CP/U (CP/M emulator for Unix) running on Linux
so with luck I should be able to get UZI downloaded and run UZI under Linux
8-)
Alan
Bill Gunshannon
Sure wish I could run LINUX or 386bsd and X on that.
bill
--
Bill Gunshannon | "There are no evil thoughts, Mr. Reardon" Francisco
bi...@cs.uofs.edu | said softly, "except one; the refusal to think."
University of Scranton |
Scranton, Pennsylvania | #include <std.disclaimer.h>
LCDR Michael E. Dobson
until 1.3 that I had the right wini.c to use my 30Meg RLL hard drive.
Mike
Peter da Silva
> 64K+64K limit, but that's because its a 286.
No, that's because it's an 8086. Minix doesn't use protected mode.
We routinely run multimegabyte executables on our Xenix-286 boxes.
--
Peter da Silva. <pe...@sugar.neosoft.com>.
`-_-' Har du kramat din varg idag?
'U`
My Apple-II has more RAM than my Mac!
Udo Munk
Hm, I'm running CP/M 2.2 and CP/M 3.0 under COHERENT 4.0. Years ago I wrote
a Z80 emulation in C, to test it I wrote the hardware needed for CP/M in C :)
and tested the CPU emulation with CP/M and some programs. The package also
includes a Z80 cross-assembler to assemble the BIOS and boot loader. I've used
it on various UNIX systems, I bet it also runs under Linux without changes.
The package may be copied and used free of fee for personal non commercial
use. An older release is available from raven.alaska.edu, if someone is
willing to upload my current version to raven, let me know and I'll email
it (I have no ftp access and not enough time to email it to everyone who
wants it).
--
Udo Munk, Oberstr. 21, 4040 Neuss 1, Germany
u...@umunk.GUN.de ...!{mcshh,smurf,unido}!easix!umunk!udo CIS: 100021,2515
uucp: +49 2131 278869 V22/32/42bis 8N1 login: uucp pwd: public MYNAME=bbsuser
request file /usr/spool/uucppublic/info for instructions
Randy Wright
> : >In article <9304...@fcshome.UUCP> fre...@fcshome.UUCP (fred smith) writes:
> : >
> : >>Linux is 386-specific, unfortunately.
> : >
> : >Frankly, I think the proper "unfortunate" fact is that 386 machines
>
> : A 386sx is a drop in the bucket these days. Even a full fledged dx cpu is a
>
> (etc, etc)
>
> : Granted, this is a minimum system, but it is very usuable. I've seen postings
> : about people running 386bsd on a 20MHz 386sx (price: ~$150).
>
> I use Coherent 4.0, the 32-bit 386-specific version, on a 16-mhz 386-SX.
> It has 2 MB of RAM, and the 45 MB hard drive is divided evenly down the middle.
> for Coherent. Obviously, I'm not running gcc or X11R5 on my computer, but
> I can use Coherent very well...
>
>
> --
> steven j. sobol, head honcho, The Tiny Software Co. sjs...@tiny.com
> Disclaimer: I own TSC's opinions. :)
> APK Public Access Internet: telnet to ! Drown the soul, and through the eyes
> wariat.org or call 216-481-9436 ! you'll see the future so cold &
> (2400 baud) or 481-1960 (9600 and up) ! lonely (House of Love)
>
any computer at all, you are rich. I get letters from people in the
ex-soviet union who are looking for work. They might have a masters
degree with several years experience, but a 286 is out of reach. In
fact, lunch might even be out of reach. They can't watch misc.jobs.
Randy
--
________________________________________________________________________
r...@rwsys.wimsey.bc.ca (Randy Wright) PGP2.2 key available
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Will Rose
I suppose if you were really feeling tricky, it might be possible to
run UZI on the (underlying) Z80 emulator in MYZ80. I wish I had the
time to try this, but realistically I haven't and won't in the forseeable
future. (MYZ80 is a *superb* CP/M emulator for the 386/486, written by
Simeon Cran (?) and around $40 shareware. I've tried a number of CP/M
emulators for DOS and Unix, and this is the only one I've found that
really works. I actually run the Z-system, and now I've got the fast
CP/M machine I always wanted...)
This is way off beam - followups to comp.os.cpm?
Henk de Groot
>No, that's because it's an 8086. Minix doesn't use protected mode.
Minix DOES use protected mode! The problem is only that Minix keeps the code
and the data in their own segment. One could say that the instructions to
mess with the segment registers are considered 'priveledged' instructions
and are therefor not for use in a user program (they are not priveleged
however, a user program could execute the instructions without running in a
trap).
>We routinely run multimegabyte executables on our Xenix-286 boxes.
Yes you can if you let your user programs use more than two segments.
Obviously Xenix can manage it. I bet it bings back all the memory model
horror to when compiling programs for it (or is everything far code and
far data?).
>My Apple-II has more RAM than my Mac!
My 286 has more RAM than a stock 486 motherboard.
Henk de Groot.
Michael Will
>While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
>PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
>Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
Minix for example. Look into the appropriate newsgroups for more information...
(comp.os.minix as far as I remember)
Cheers, Michael Will
--
pgp Key fingerprint = 58 9A 37 2A A8 C6 0E 3E 3A C9 CF 40 46 08 B9 39
Happily using Linux 0.99p7A with X11R5, \LaTeX, cnews/nn/uucp and... pgp!
>>> Ask for Linux and / or pgp-Information <<<
Michael Will <mich...@desaster.hanse.de> Linux - share and enjoy :-)
Mark Newton
> scott allen long wrote:
> : You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
> : just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
> : What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
> As a matter of fact, there's this system called UZI,
> a Unix Z80 Implementation, that tries to do just that.
Reminds me of something I saw in a humor newsgroup (aus.jokes) last year:
[----------8<---------]
ZX80/81 owners unite. Research is currently underway into a version
of UNIX for the stock standard ZX81, call ZUNIX. Using a new mega
super ultra data compression method (involves a hyrdraulic press) the
follow features have been implemented in ZUNIX -
* Runs in the standard 1.5K. No need to go for that wasteful
extra 4K or 16K RAM upgrade.
* Will be licensed in 100 and 200 user versions
* Efficient paging and swapping to cassette tape at 300 baud.
Later versions will support multiple cassette recorders for really
high performance IO.
* Includes all Unix tools, networking and X. Full source included.
* Able to fully use all expanded and extended memory (i.e above
the 1.5K limit)
* Includes software to emulate a PC running MSDOS (similar to VPIX
and DOS MERGE).
* Support for Hyperchannel Interface (enables CRAY to be used as
a frontend)
* Support for real time processes.
We've been beta testing ZUNIX for the past year, using 150 developers,
all going through the edit-compile-link cycle all day. The only performance
degradation we've noticed is when Jeff (the ZX81 is on his desk) has
to swap cassette tapes. Even this will be fixed when we write the
drivers for multiple cassette recorders. Can't wait!!
ZUNIX is expected to sell in the $1.50 -> $2.00 range, on a single cassette
tape, from <J>oint <O>perational <K>ode <E>ngineering. Even after ZUNIX
has been fully implemented we anticipate there will be (as you can
imagine) a large amount of the 1.5K main memory free. To this end we
invite you to post your suggestions for further features that could
be implemented in the remaining space (eg traffic control system for
large city).
Tite Kode
Director
Joint Operational Kode Engineering
[----------8<---------]
- mark :-)
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I tried an internal modem, new...@monty.apana.org.au
but it hurt when I walked. Mark Newton
----- Voice: +61-8-3224071 --------------- Data: +61-8-3222915 -----
Peter da Silva
hasn't changed.
In article <groot.7...@baukje.idca.tds.philips.nl> gr...@idca.tds.philips.nl (Henk de Groot) writes:
> >We routinely run multimegabyte executables on our Xenix-286 boxes.
> I bet it bings back all the memory model horror to when compiling programs
> for it (or is everything far code and far data?).
No. It's not *fun*, but since the base API doesn't assume segments it's not
a really *bad* experience... so long as you avoid VAXist code.
--
Peter da Silva. <pe...@sugar.neosoft.com>.
`-_-' Har du kramat din varg idag?
'U`
Ken Nakata CIS stnt
>In article <jburney....@hydra.nodc.noaa.gov> jbu...@hydra.nodc.noaa.gov (Jeff Burney) writes:
>>
>>Oh yeah, well I'm running Unix, DOS6.0, VMS and OSF/1 simultaneously,
>>in different Gem windows on an Atari 800 with 48k and a 51/4" external drive.
>>HAHAHAHAHAHAHA....ahem, sorry.
>
>...and I'm running Unix, Windows NT, OS/2, VMS and QDOS (the OF of Sinclair QL,
>full multitasking) in a ZX81 with 1k (but w/ 800 Mb of musicassette swap area).
>
>:-)
Excuse me. But shouldn't all you folks move to alt.folklore.computers
to continue this any more? It seems to me that this thread has become
too inappropriate to fit here comp.os.386bsd.questions, comp.os.linux
or whatever, hasn't it?
Ken Nakata
--
/* I apologize if there are incorrect, rude, and/or impolite expressions in
this mail or post. They are not intended. Please consider that English is a
second language for me and I don't have full understanding of certain words
or each nuance of a phrase. Thank you. -- Ken Nakata, CIS student, NJIT */
Frank Rabe
> Some people post: Upgrade your PC , don't upgrade you PC , upgrade ...
I'm using Minix since ver. 1.3 and have read this newsgroup since that time.
So I remember times where people take care about Minix , wrote code for it
and POSTED source. The newsgroups was very interesting, people introduced their
work to all others on the group. Mostly every day there was something new, small
but beautyful.
Today new stuff is not posted, only available via FTP. For people out of
university and no access to FTP impossible to get things. New developments
stay local to the universities where developed.
And the biggest trafic? The most arcticles? High Activity?
When there is a chance for flaming, or stupid discussion which is THE REAL
OS , which THE REAL compiler can start over again, the people are there.
It doesn't matter WHAT was the question, there is somebody who know what is
CHEAP OR GOOD for somebody else perhaps in a different country , financial
situation and ...
More often in the last month I'm wondering whether I'm reading COMP.OS.MINIX
or the junk newsgroup, perhaps my tin newsreader changes the newsgroups whitout
noticeing me ...
So can somebody explain me the sense of this newsgroup at the current situation?
Is it so difficult to accept a different point of view, the questions and
mistakes of somebody else, but give him help?
So lets flame again: Is Minix a real OS , was bcc or Cvw a real compiler ,
is LINUX whit the SMALL gnu stuff and SMALL X the solution for everybody
and everything?
Note: I' m a stupid QNX programmer and have private fun with Minix for about
5 or 6 years. First on a 286, then a 386 and know 486.
I apologize to everbody for having fun with something YOU told me it's
impossible to have fun with.
Frank Rabe
Peter R. Tattam
>From: davi...@ariel.crd.GE.COM (william E Davidsen)
>Subject: Re: Unix CAN be used on a minimal system! (Re: Unix OS for 286)
>Date: Wed, 21 Apr 1993 19:19:18 GMT
>In article <1r39hu...@srvr1.engin.umich.edu>, sco...@engin.umich.edu (scott allen long) writes:
>| You people are all masochists! Next we'll be hearing from a guy who is "doing
>| just fine" running Unix on an Altair 8800 with 64k of memory and an 8" floppy!
>| What do you guys do, read Great Novels while your computer boots up?
> No, change floppy disks! It adds a whole new meaning to the term
>"swapping."
>--
>bill davidsen, GE Corp. R&D Center; Box 8; Schenectady NY 12345
> Last year I worried that Bush would die and let Quayle take over.
> This year I worry that Hillary will die and let Bill take over.
That's nothing.... in my first year uni, we hard to write our programs up on
paper and hand them in to be typed up. Sometimes it would take a week to get
your program back. It was pure joy to be able to have your own login
account. Those were the days....
Peter
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
P.Tattam International Phone 61-02-202346
Programmer, Psychology Department Australia Phone 002-202346
University of Tasmania, Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter da Silva
send them to be keypunched, hand-check the edit deck, send it in, hand-check
the resulting listing, request a new deck punch when you finally got it clean
through all this, and then submit the deck.
To make it even more fun...
This was for converting COBOL code from one version of COBOL to another.
--
Peter da Silva. <pe...@sugar.neosoft.com>.
`-_-' Har du kramat din varg idag?
'U`
"Det er min ledsager, det er ikke drikkepenge."
Louis Giliberto
: In article <groot.7...@baukje.idca.tds.philips.nl> gr...@idca.tds.philips.nl (Henk de Groot) writes:
: > Minix 1.5 will run fine as a UNIX system on a 286. Of course there is an
: > 64K+64K limit, but that's because its a 286.
: No, that's because it's an 8086. Minix doesn't use protected mode.
Yes Minix uses protected mode, however it uses segmented memory while
the compiler wants a flat address space. So you get one seg for code (I)
and one for data (D), and the compiler just generates offsets.
If you look at a DOS compiler's assembly output, you'll see it goes
through all these shenanigans to have multiple code and data segments
known affectionately as @DATA and @CODE groups.
On a 386 you can work like that, but jack the seg size up to a couple
of gigs. In fact, you can hop to protected mode, change the segment
size to say 512K, then hop to real mode and you'll have 512K segments
under MS-DOS. k00l! Don't waste your money on a 386 DOS-extender
just so you can store a 512K array - use assembly!
Heh.
-Louis
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Louis J. Giliberto, Jr. ! ma...@drktowr.chi.il.us (send here)
-sysadmin drktowr ! ma...@gagme.chi.il.us (forwards to above)
Chicago, IL USA ! lgi...@math.luc.edu (probably OK)
Home of DarkTower Software ! lgi...@orion.it.luc.edu (anal-retentive quotas)
! lgi...@mica.meddean.luc.edu (best luc.edu sys)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"Try his first wife's maiden name backwards" -- Cheshire Catalyst
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Dane Jasper
: From article <1993Apr20....@vedge.com>, by hen...@vedge.com (Hendrik Boom):
: > sa...@halcyon.com (Scott Philip Sable) writes:
: > : I am in desperate need of any and all help!!! I am currently trying to
: > : find a Unix OS for an Intel 286 machine. I have tried a number of
: > While we are on the topic of old machines, I have an old 640K 8088-based
: > PC clone -- no hard disk even, and one can't be added -- THis is OLD --
: > Does anyone know a Unix that will run on it?
: Hey, I've got one of those Sharp scientific calculators (the EL-5813).
: It says it's programmable, is there a Unix that'll run on it?
That's nothing - I've got an HP48sx that supports up to 1M of ram - how
about that? (after all, I have a term program for it, X, Y and Zmodem, and
Kermit is built in.) Neat thing is, it has a four-wire serial port (not to
mention infra-red) so I could put a modem or terminals on it. The first
dialup calculator! =)
Dane