Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!rutgers!ucsd!ucsdhub!esosun!seismo!uunet!sco!brianm From: brianm@sco.COM (Brian Moffet) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga Subject: Will Xenix Run on AT BridgeBoard? (was Re: Product Marketing Tutorial) Keywords: compatability Message-ID: <789@viscous> Date: 21 Aug 88 00:19:03 GMT References: <2167@ssc-vax.UUCP> <64636@sun.uucp> <782@viscous> <65003@sun.uucp> Reply-To: brianm@sco.COM (Brian Moffet) Organization: The Santa Cruz Operation, Inc. Lines: 28 In article <65003@sun.uucp> cmcmanis@sun.UUCP (Chuck McManis) writes: >In article <782@viscous> brianm@sco.COM (Brian Moffet) writes: >> Therefore, using SCO Xenix, which needs almost exact *hardware* >> compatability with an AT, on the bridgeboard will not work. > >And this is where you are mistaken. The BridgeBoard is an *exact* PC >clone on a board, right down to the DMA controller and Timer chips. The DMA and timer chips are good, but how about all the other hardware? AT type hard disk Controller on IRQ 14? FLoppy drive on IRQ 6? Same exact port addressing for the keyboard? If it is exactly the same (good move on CBM's part) then SCO Xenix should run. However, I won't hold my breath. I do not have an AT bridge board. I assumed (possibly wrongly) that Commodore would take the easy way out and have the video be a direct match, and maybe the floppy, but there would be distinct lacks as far as the keyboard and other hardware (serial ports) were concerned. If anyone in the Santa Cruz Area is interested in trying this out, let me know. I would be interested to see if SCO Xenix actually worked on the Amiga 2000 with an AT bridgeboard. -- -=-=-=-=-=-=- Brian Moffet brianm@sco.com {ucscc,uunet,decvax!microsof}!sco!brianm My opinions do not in any way reflect those of my employer or my fish. 'Evil Geniuses for a Better Tommorrow!'