Xref: utzoo comp.sys.atari.st:18402 comp.os.minix:6705
Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!watmath!att!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!mcvax!ukc!reading!bru-cc!ralph
From: ralph@cc.brunel.ac.uk (Ralph Mitchell)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st,comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: Multitasking on the ST
Message-ID: <793@Terra.cc.brunel.ac.uk>
Date: 8 Aug 89 09:22:33 GMT
References: <8908021826.AA05333@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU> <15627@watdragon.waterloo.edu> <652@opal.tubopal.UUCP> <15706@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Reply-To: ralph@ccs.brunel.ac.uk (Ralph Mitchell)
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK
Lines: 25

In article <15706@watdragon.waterloo.edu> swklassen@dahlia.waterloo.edu (Steven W. Klassen) writes:
>In article <652@opal.tubopal.UUCP> alderaan@tubopal.UUCP (Thomas Cervera) writes:
 >>
 >>  What's all this about MultiTasking on the ST ? You don't have a MMU (not
 >>really and I think that's the worst failure in the ST's hardware architechture),
 >>so you are definetely not able to run a *secure* multitasking on this machine
 >>even if you want to - basta. All what you can call protected memory inside the 
 >>[...]
 >Oh really?  Then how do you explain the appearance of Minix (a Unix
 >look-alike) for the Atari ST?
 >
 >I have cross posted this to the Minix newsgroup.  I thought you (Thomas)
 >might be interested in telling those who gave the ST multitasking
 >just why what they have done is not possible.

Actually, he did say SECURE multitasking was not possible.  i.e. One
process address space is not protected against another process writing
all over it.

Ralph Mitchell
-- 
JANET: ralph@uk.ac.brunel.cc  ARPA:  ralph%cc.brunel.ac.uk@cwi.nl
UUCP:  ...ukc!cc.brunel!ralph PHONE: +44 895 74000 x2561
"There's so many different worlds, so many different Suns" - Dire Straits
"Never underestimate the power of human stupidity" - Salvor Hardin, Foundation