jensen@utgpu.UUCP (04/30/87)
Perhaps I have missed the discussion but I'm hearing a number of rumours about bugs in the Intel 80386 when running under Unix/Xenix. Apparently the chips can be returned for new ones even. Has anyone ever run SCO Xenix on the 386? -- Mike Jensen
rab@rabtrs (Rich Bilancia) (05/03/87)
> Perhaps I have missed the discussion but I'm hearing a number of rumours about > bugs in the Intel 80386 when running under Unix/Xenix. Apparently the chips > can be returned for new ones even. Has anyone ever run SCO Xenix on the 386? > -- Mike Jensen Not only have I gotten SCO XENIX to run on a Compaq Deskpro/386 flawlessly, I've also installed an Intel Inboard/386 processor in an AT compatible and have that working with SCO XENIX. I also have written an article for the August issue of UNIX/World taking a first look at XENIX System V/386 in both of the above hardware environments. ^^^ Keep an eye open for it. --- "Adversity is the crucible from which greatness is forged." - Ken Baker ____ ____ ___ / _ \ / _ \ / _ \ Richard A. Bilancia / / \_/ / / \_/ _ \ \\/ Computer Guidance & Support / / / / _ | | \ \ P. O. Box 620127 \ \ _ \ \ | \ | + | \ \ Littleton, Colorado 80162 \ \_/ \ \ \_| \ |_| /\_| \ voice: (303) 973-4035 \____/ \____/ \____/ hao!{udenva|isis}!bilanc!rab Multi-User Accounting Solutions attmail!bilanc!rab
tony@killer.UUCP (Tony Holden) (05/08/87)
in article <146@rabtrs>, rab@rabtrs (Rich Bilancia) says: > > I also have written an article for the August issue of UNIX/World taking a > first look at XENIX System V/386 in both of the above hardware environments. > ^^^ > Keep an eye open for it. Gee Rich, not that I won't look for and read your article, but how about a hint. Do we have to wait till August to at least find out if it's any good or not? Just a one liner might do. Tony Holden ihnp4!killer!tony
neighorn@qiclab.UUCP (Steven C. Neighorn) (05/09/87)
In article <1987Apr30.144507.18240@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu> jensen@gpu.utcs.toronto.edu (Michael Jensen) writes: >Perhaps I have missed the discussion but I'm hearing a number of rumours about >bugs in the Intel 80386 when running under Unix/Xenix. Apparently the chips >can be returned for new ones even. Has anyone ever run SCO Xenix on the 386? >-- Mike Jensen Intel has admitted to a problem with incorrect results on some multiply combinations in native 32-bit mode. These problems will not surface running msdos or '286 unix/xenix on your 80386, but they *could* appear when running an 80386 operating system. Yes, Xenix *and* unix are running on the 80386. Microport Systems Inc of Scotts Valley Ca is taking orders for a full 80386 version of SV3 that is to be delivered in July. Rumor has it that they are currently getting SVID ok from AT&T. The price is supposed to be around $800 for the software development kit, the text preparation kit, and the runtime system. The recent large posting of Dhrystone benchmarks listed several entries for Xenix 386 (also SV3) running on Multibus equipment. While I haven't seen any non-beta/end-user sites running either of these systems, I HOPE it is only a matter of time until anyone who has a 80386 can start actually using the other 50% of the silicon that until now has gone to waste emulating lesser chips. -- Steven C. Neighorn tektronix!{psu-cs,reed}!qiclab!neighorn Portland Public Schools "Where we train young Star Fighters to defend the (503) 249-2000 ext 337 frontier against Xur and the Ko-dan Armada"
rab@rabtrs (Rich Bilancia) (05/13/87)
> in article <146@rabtrs>, rab@rabtrs (Rich Bilancia) says: > > > > I also have written an article for the August issue of UNIX/World taking a > > first look at XENIX System V/386 in both of the above hardware environments. > > ^^^ > > Keep an eye open for it. > > > Gee Rich, not that I won't look for and read your article, but how about a > hint. Do we have to wait till August to at least find out if it's any good > or not? Just a one liner might do. > > Tony Holden > ihnp4!killer!tony OK, here's some of the article Either UNIX systems really are getting easier to install or I'm just getting used to the level of difficulty. But, I really think that it's the former because XENIX 386 is easier to install than any other version of XENIX that I've used. The default installation is with a single hard disk partition on the primary hard disk and a reasonable default swap space of 2.5MB. The system seems very fast while reading diskettes, formatting the hard drive, booting the system, and screen refreshing in general. Those impressions were not incorrect as you'll see below. One of the significant limitations of XENIX on the other Intel microprocessors is the way that memory is allocated in 64K segments, requiring the implementation of memory models that are selected by the applications programmer at compilation time. The four 80286 memory models are called small, medium, large and huge. The 80386 microprocessor also allocates its virtual memory in segments, but the segments in the 386 world are 4 gigabytes large. This limitation should hardly ever, if ever at all, be a problem for application developers. In fact, the elimination of this memory model (if you'll excuse me) nonsense will likely attract many MC68000 enthusiasts to the roles of XENIX 386 developers. Of course I had to verify the promise of upwards XENIX software portability, so I chose to check two of my favorite XENIX System V/286 tools: the Korn Shell from Aspen Technology (Parsipanny, New Jersey) and the Accell Integrated Development System from Unify Corporation (Sacramento, California). True to the XENIX promise of binary code compatibility, both products performed flawlessly in the XENIX 386 environment. The only problem that I experienced with XENIX 386 was a bug in the Gamma Release kernel that was documented and corrected too late for inclusion in the Gamma Release 3.05. The one other thing that did surprise me with many of the utilities that are distributed with XENIX 386 is that they are not recompiled 386 code, but rather the same executables that are distributed with XENIX System V/286.
janm@runx.ips.oz (Jan Mikkelsen) (05/18/87)
>or not? Just a one liner might do. > >Tony Holden >ihnp4!killer!tony Well, I would very much like to know how this much-hyped Intel chip really performs ... Some hints would be appreciated; That issue won't make it here (Australia) until November! Jan Mikkelsen ACSnet: janm@runx.ips.oz JANET: runx.ips.oz!janm@ukc ARPA: janm%runx.ips.oz@seismo.css.gov CSNET: janm@runx.ips.oz UUCP: {enea,hplabs,mcvax,prlb2,seismo,ubc-vision,ukc}!munnari!runx.ips.oz!janm "He's dead, Jim."