valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) (05/25/90)
In article <568.265bae49@waikato.ac.nz> hamish@waikato.ac.nz writes: > >> You would need, at the very least, a 68020 and MMU, or a 68030. > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > A 68010 and 68451 MMU will run Unix. Only trouble is the 451 isn't very > compatible with the 851. However an 851 can be hooked up to a 68010, by > faking the co-processor connection with moves to the cpu space, by fiddling > the alternate address space registers. Actually, a 68020 is necessary because many instructions that the UNIX operating system is using are available only on 68020+ processors. Admittedly, a special version could be compiled that used only 68010 instructions, but that would not be worth it. Speed-wise, the Release 4 kernel feels comfortable on the 68030, providing it with a 68010 would result in rather shameful performances. Valentin -- The Goddess of democracy? "The tyrants Name: Valentin Pepelea may distroy a statue, but they cannot Phone: (215) 431-9327 kill a god." UseNet: cbmvax!valentin@uunet.uu.net - Ancient Chinese Proverb Claimer: I not Commodore spokesman be
lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca (Larry Phillips) (05/28/90)
In <595.26615485@waikato.ac.nz>, hamish@waikato.ac.nz writes: > >Maybe you haven't seen a sun-2 workstation? They used a 68010 processor and >they ran unix. What you say here is that Unix won't run on anything but a >68020, 68030 and later a 68040. What about all those Unix versions that run >on processors like 80386, SPARC, MIPS, VAX 11-780, .......... He was talking about a specific implementation. He is saying that the Amiga will not run Unix withiut a 68020/030/040. Sure, there have been implementations of Unix on 68010 (and even 68000, in the case of the Sun 1), and in fact I have one (Sun 2/50) right beside my Amiga. The implementations based on a 68010 were specifically written to be run on a 68010. -larry -- The raytracer of justice recurses slowly, but it renders exceedingly fine. +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+ | // Larry Phillips | | \X/ lphillips@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca -or- uunet!van-bc!lpami!lphillips | | COMPUSERVE: 76703,4322 -or- 76703.4322@compuserve.com | +-----------------------------------------------------------------------+
hamish@waikato.ac.nz (05/28/90)
In article <11786@cbmvax.commodore.com>, valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com (Valentin Pepelea) writes: > In article <568.265bae49@waikato.ac.nz> hamish@waikato.ac.nz writes: >> >>> You would need, at the very least, a 68020 and MMU, or a 68030. >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ >> A 68010 and 68451 MMU will run Unix. Only trouble is the 451 isn't very >> compatible with the 851. However an 851 can be hooked up to a 68010, by >> faking the co-processor connection with moves to the cpu space, by fiddling >> the alternate address space registers. > > Actually, a 68020 is necessary because many instructions that the UNIX > operating system is using are available only on 68020+ processors. Admittedly, > a special version could be compiled that used only 68010 instructions, but > that would not be worth it. Speed-wise, the Release 4 kernel feels comfortable > on the 68030, providing it with a 68010 would result in rather shameful > performances. > > Valentin > -- > The Goddess of democracy? "The tyrants Name: Valentin Pepelea > may distroy a statue, but they cannot Phone: (215) 431-9327 > kill a god." UseNet: cbmvax!valentin@uunet.uu.net > - Ancient Chinese Proverb Claimer: I not Commodore spokesman be -- Maybe you haven't seen a sun-2 workstation? They used a 68010 processor and they ran unix. What you say here is that Unix won't run on anything but a 68020, 68030 and later a 68040. What about all those Unix versions that run on processors like 80386, SPARC, MIPS, VAX 11-780, .......... ============================================================================== | Hamish Marson | Internet hamish@waikato.ac.nz | | Computer Support Person | Phone (071)562889 xt 8181 | | Computer Science Department | Amiga 3000 for ME! | | University of Waikato | | ============================================================================== |Disclaimer: Anything said in this message is the personal opinion of the | | finger hitting the keyboard & doesn't represent my employers | | opinion in any way. (ie we probably don't agree) | ==============================================================================
GWO110%URIACC.BITNET@brownvm.brown.edu (F. Michael Theilig) (05/28/90)
On 28 May 90 04:40:37 GMT you said: >In article <11786@cbmvax.commodore.com>, valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com >(Valentin Pepelea) writes: >> >> Actually, a 68020 is necessary because many instructions that the UNIX >> operating system is using are available only on 68020+ processors. >Admittedly, >> a special version could be compiled that used only 68010 instructions, but >> that would not be worth it. Speed-wise, the Release 4 kernel feels >comfortable >> on the 68030, providing it with a 68010 would result in rather shameful >> performances. >> >> Valentin >> -- > >Maybe you haven't seen a sun-2 workstation? They used a 68010 processor and >they ran unix. What you say here is that Unix won't run on anything but a >68020, 68030 and later a 68040. What about all those Unix versions that run >on processors like 80386, SPARC, MIPS, VAX 11-780, .......... > I think his point was that AMIX requires an 020 or better. You could probably get Unix running on a 6502, you just wouldn't *WANT* to. I have a machine that runs Xenix on a 68000, but I don't brag about it. ---- F. Michael Theilig - The University of Rhode Island at Little Rest GWO110 at URIACC.Bitnet GKZ117 at URIACC.Bitnet "He is a borderline genius that experiences peridoic phases of abject stupidity."
es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) (05/29/90)
In article <20392@snow-white.udel.EDU> GWO110%URIACC.BITNET@brownvm.brown.edu (F. Michael Theilig) writes: >On 28 May 90 04:40:37 GMT you said: >>In article <11786@cbmvax.commodore.com>, valentin@cbmvax.commodore.com >>(Valentin Pepelea) writes: >>> >>> Actually, a 68020 is necessary because many instructions that the UNIX >>> operating system is using are available only on 68020+ processors. >>Admittedly, >>> a special version could be compiled that used only 68010 instructions, but >>> that would not be worth it. Speed-wise, the Release 4 kernel feels >>comfortable >>> on the 68030, providing it with a 68010 would result in rather shameful >>> performances. >>> >>> Valentin >>> -- >> >>Maybe you haven't seen a sun-2 workstation? They used a 68010 processor and >>they ran unix. What you say here is that Unix won't run on anything but a >>68020, 68030 and later a 68040. What about all those Unix versions that run >>on processors like 80386, SPARC, MIPS, VAX 11-780, .......... >> > I think his point was that AMIX requires an 020 or better. You could > probably get Unix running on a 6502, you just wouldn't *WANT* to. I have > a machine that runs Xenix on a 68000, but I don't brag about it. Actually I don't think that was his point either. He specifically points out release 4 of AT&T Unix. It has already been noted that 4 is much slower than 3, its predecessor. This makes the speed more important. > > ---- > F. Michael Theilig - The University of Rhode Island at Little Rest > GWO110 at URIACC.Bitnet > GKZ117 at URIACC.Bitnet > >"He is a borderline genius that experiences > peridoic phases of abject stupidity." -- Ethan Ethan Solomita: es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu "If Commodore had to market sushi they'd call it `raw cold fish'" -- The Bandito, inevitably stolen from someone else
fredc@usenet.umr.edu (Fred Clauss) (05/30/90)
In article <1649@lpami.wimsey.bc.ca>, (Larry Phillips) writes: > >Sure, there have been implementations of Unix on 68010 (and even 68000, in the >case of the Sun 1), and in fact I have one (Sun 2/50) right beside my Amiga. >The implementations based on a 68010 were specifically written to be run on a >68010. > Larry definitely has hit the nail on the head here. Speed is not really the issue here. The issue is the cost of maintaining more than one basic kernel because you are supporting different processors. Even Sun has quit offering SunOS upgrades at the 4.X level for the Sun2 line of processors, because upgrading separate a version for the 68010-based architecture was no longer justifiable. Since C-A never built a 68010-based machine, there is really no reason for it to create and maintain a separate version of Amiga UNIX for the 68010. As for the 68000, non-hardware assisted VM is "as slow as molasses in January," so very few UNIX afficiondos would be willing to settle for a 68000-based UNIX in today's market. -- Fred Clauss INTERNET: fredc@isc.umr.edu (preferred) Intelligent Systems Center or flc@umree.ee.umr.edu University of Missouri UUNET: {occrsh|sunarch}!umree!flc Rolla, MO 65401 BITNET: S081192@UMRVMA