[comp.sys.ibm.pc] Unix vs AMI bios

rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) (11/11/89)

jerry@starfish.Convergent.COM (Gerald Hawkins) writes:
> ...if you want to run UN*X then you are best to stay with Phoenix
> BIOS.  I'm told that you can't run it with AMI or Award...

Why not?  Details, please.  The various flavors of V.3 UNIX for the 386
only use the BIOS to boot, so it would seem that if the BIOS can boot the
machine at all, it can boot a UNIX kernel...and after that, it shouldn't
matter.
-- 
Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com    uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd     (303)449-2870
   ...Keep your day job 'til your night job pays.

davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.COM (Wm E Davidsen Jr) (11/13/89)

jerry@starfish.Convergent.COM (Gerald Hawkins) writes:
> ...if you want to run UN*X then you are best to stay with Phoenix
> BIOS.  I'm told that you can't run it with AMI or Award...

  Someone is giving you a bunch of hogwash. I have been running SCO
Xenix on an AMI for three years, and have run Xenix, 386/ix, and
MicroPort on AMI, Award, and Pheonix. The only significant AMI problem
was fixed in 1987, and only affected DOS programs which read the
keyboard in weird ways (ie. games). I'm told that ESIX runs on Award and
AMI, but haven't tried it personally.
-- 
bill davidsen	(davidsen@crdos1.crd.GE.COM -or- uunet!crdgw1!crdos1!davidsen)
"The world is filled with fools. They blindly follow their so-called
'reason' in the face of the church and common sense. Any fool can see
that the world is flat!" - anon

wcurtiss@x102c.harris-atd.com (Curtiss WC 67625) (11/14/89)

In article <1989Nov10.200029.3693@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>jerry@starfish.Convergent.COM (Gerald Hawkins) writes:
>> ...if you want to run UN*X then you are best to stay with Phoenix
>> BIOS.  I'm told that you can't run it with AMI or Award...
>
>Why not?  Details, please.  The various flavors of V.3 UNIX for the 386
>only use the BIOS to boot, so it would seem that if the BIOS can boot the
>machine at all, it can boot a UNIX kernel...and after that, it shouldn't
                 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>matter.
>-- 
>Dick Dunn     rcd@ico.isc.com    uucp: {ncar,nbires}!ico!rcd     (303)449-2870
>   ...Keep your day job 'til your night job pays.

Therein lies the problem.  We have AT&T System V/386 Version 3.2 and
Upgrade 2.1.  Both boot fine on a Compaq.  Both boot fine on a 16 MHz
Televideo.  Neither boots on a 25 MHz Televideo.  Neither originally
booted on a 16 MHz Zenith.  A BIOS upgrade to a later version allowed 3.2 to
boot.  A preliminary BIOS upgrade allowd the Upgrade 2.1 to boot.

The only common theme to the systems which did not boot UNIX, right away was
that they have the setup in ROM.  As near as I can guess, by going through
the code for the UNIX boot routines, the kernel is expecting some areas
about 640K to be free, while in a regular PC this may not be the case (after
all, AT&T System V/386 is only guaranteed to run on an AT&T 6386).

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
William Curtiss         407/984-6383            |    "The only good martyr
Harris GISD, Melbourne, FL  32902               |         is a dead martyr."
Internet: wcurtiss%x102c@trantor.harris-atd.com | - Standard disclamers apply -