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.