Date: Tue, 14 Nov 2000 16:02:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Terry Lambert <tlambert@primenet.com> To: stork@qnet.com (Heredity Choice) Cc: grog@lemis.com (Greg Lehey), tlambert@primenet.com (Terry Lambert), cfuhrman@tfcci.com (Chris Fuhrman), chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Microsoft Source (fwd) Message-ID: <200011141602.JAA19964@usr08.primenet.com> In-Reply-To: <001b01c04c66$e8320020$6cc6ddd1@STORK> from "Heredity Choice" at Nov 11, 2000 09:10:43 PM
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > > only". Originally, Xenix only ran on 68000 hardware. > > > > Do you have any evidence for this? Admittedly, there was 68000 > > hardware at the time, but it was very early, and there's no obvious > > reason why Microsoft (which was definitely in charge of XENIX) would > > have bothered to port to an architecture they didn't plan to use, > > especially since it was big-endian and 32 bit, whereas both the PDP-11 > > and i86 were little-endian and 16 bit. I'd suspect that you're > > extrapolating here. > > I have seen Xenix on a Radioshack computer which had the 68000 processor. The Tandy 6000. It had the cutest hack, too: it ran 2 68000 processors, and when one took a protection fault, it would use the state from the other processor, one clock behind, in order to recover the otherwise destroyed instruction counter. Ah, I remember the thing well... truly a mrvel of silver and black plastic; our had a 14" HD, with a monster 10MB of space... I think this was one of the last machines where we distributed our software on 8" Shugart floppies... Terry Lambert terry@lambert.org --- Any opinions in this posting are my own and not those of my present or previous employers. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200011141602.JAA19964>