Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!mnetor!seismo!lll-lcc!ames!amdahl!oliveb!sun!cmcmanis From: cmcmanis@sun.uucp (Chuck McManis) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Forwarded message Message-ID: <10979@sun.uucp> Date: Mon, 5-Jan-87 18:54:16 EST Article-I.D.: sun.10979 Posted: Mon Jan 5 18:54:16 1987 Date-Received: Tue, 6-Jan-87 02:40:24 EST References: <8701022135.AA07189@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <7472@utzoo.UUCP> <539@eneevax.UUCP> Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Lines: 20 Summary: 8086 mmu What Henry was probably referring to is the segment registers that the 80x86 family has. They offer a certain amount of code relocatability that is unavailable on vanilla 68K machines. (Yes you can use "small model" on the 68000 but you still have problems with the dynamic loading of tasks) When properly written 8086 segments can be swapped into and out of memory without the program knowing about it. But I agree, multitasking doesn't imply an MMU. Look at either the Amiga or OS-9 on the ST for examples. The biggest problem of porting MINIX would be porting the C compiler, since compiler design breaks down into two camps, the parser and the code generator. You would literally have to rewrite half of the compiler to port it. -- --Chuck McManis uucp: {anywhere}!sun!cmcmanis BIX: cmcmanis ARPAnet: cmcmanis@sun.com These opinions are my own and no one elses, but you knew that didn't you.