Date: Tue, 13 Jun 2006 08:03:17 +0200 (CEST) From: Otto Moerbeek <otto@drijf.net> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: John Nemeth <jnemeth@victoria.tc.ca>, misc@openbsd.org, Ted Unangst <ted.unangst@gmail.com>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, =?iso-8859-1?Q?H=E1morszky_Bal=E1zs?= <balihb@ogyi.hu>, netbsd-users@NetBSD.org, Nikolas Britton <nikolas.britton@gmail.com> Subject: Re: wikipedia article Message-ID: <Pine.BSO.4.64.0606130802280.16242@lou.intra.drijf.net> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNMEBMFEAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNMEBMFEAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > >-----Original Message----- > >From: John Nemeth [mailto:jnemeth@victoria.tc.ca] > >Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 1:15 PM > >To: Ted Mittelstaedt; Nikolas Britton; Ted Unangst > >Cc: Hamorszky Balazs; misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org; > >netbsd-users@NetBSD.org > >Subject: RE: wikipedia article > > > > > >On Nov 1, 6:11pm, "Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote: > >} > >} Prior to the release of the 80386 the Intel processors didn't have > >} memory protection which was a requirement of any processor running > >} the BSD kernel. > > > > This is not entirely true. The 80286 had memory protection. > >However, its memory protection was completely based on segments (i.e. > >it could not do paging). > > Oh, yeah, your right about that. Me bad. > > >Also, it was only a 16 bit processor. > > What was the bit size of the CPU's originally used to write UNIX in Bell > Labs? What's more, iirc the MMU of the pdp11 isn't what we call a MMU today, it could not even do paging. -Otto
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSO.4.64.0606130802280.16242>