[comp.os.minix] Minix and XT Controllers

boutell@freezer.it.udel.edu (Tom Boutell) (10/11/90)

I have a hybrid machine- a 286 motherboard, with an XT RLL hard drive
controller and ST238. No flames please, it runs well and the costs have
been very reasonable. But I'm wondering if MINIX would be able to run
in protected mode on such a beast. I realize it can run on XTs, and also
on ATs- but how about this hybrid case? The AT BIOS is told there is *no*
hard drive in order to let the hard drive's own BIOS kick in, and I
imagine this might make things a little weird. I'm sure I can fire it
up in real mode as a "very quick XT," but before I invest a heap of money
in Minix, will I be able to fire it up in protected mode at all?


-- 
What do you want from the fish of the fish that you fished when you fished
for the fish that you fished? How many numchuks could Chuck chuck if Chuck
could chuck numchuks? boutell@freezer.it.udel.edu? Or 27.598234821? Or not?

overby@plains.NoDak.edu (Glen Overby) (10/11/90)

In article <33023@nigel.ee.udel.edu> boutell@freezer.it.udel.edu (Tom Boutell) writes:
>I have a hybrid machine- a 286 motherboard, with an XT RLL hard drive
>controller and ST238.

No problem.  I run with a 386sx and an XT controler all the time.

What you need is a one-line change to the protected-mode gate table
in kernel/protect.c, line 148.  Change it from:

gate_table[] = {
[...]
	prs232_int, RS232_VECTOR, INTR_PRIVILEGE,
	disk_int, FLOPPY_VECTOR, INTR_PRIVILEGE,
	lpr_int, PRINTER_VECTOR, INTR_PRIVILEGE,
	wini_int, AT_WINI_VECTOR, INTR_PRIVILEGE,
  };

AT_WINI_VECTOR should become XT_WINI_VECTOR.

One of the guys in Australia first posted about this fix.
-- 
		Glen Overby	<overby@plains.nodak.edu>
	uunet!plains!overby (UUCP)  overby@plains (Bitnet)