Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen
From: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (Wm E. Davidsen Jr)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.xenix.sco
Subject: Re: badtrk,awk,df all hang a 386SX system.
Message-ID: <2302@sixhub.UUCP>
Date: 15 Nov 90 03:31:21 GMT
References: <11320001@hpwin052.HP.COM> <336@infopro.UUCP> <11203@scorn.sco.COM>
Reply-To: davidsen@sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen)
Organization: *IX Public Access UNIX, Schenectady NY
Lines: 33

In article <11203@scorn.sco.COM> rogerk (Roger Knopf 5502) writes:

| You don't say what machine you are putting this on but I remember
| we put support for at least the Compaq SX machine into release
| 2.2.3. This may be applicable to all SX machines. Not a guarantee,
| just a dim remembrance.

  Okay, I have to ask... there was a big discussion of how to tell an SX
from a DX, and no one came up with anything which would work with all
combinations of cache, etc.

  Now if it's that hard to tell the diference, just what did SCO do to
"support" Compaq's SX, unless it's seriously non-AT style. I've run old
versions of Xenix/386 and even ancient version of x/286 on an SX, and
never had a problem, even with bizarre no-name clones.

  When I tested systems for the "cheap-ix" project, I found that
anything which looked like a clone to infoplus and fastback (the old
one) would run SCO Xenix or ODT. Of course to run ODT you need a
motherboard which holds a bushel and a peck of memory, but that's
another story. Xenix ran pretty happily in 2MB.
| -- 
| Roger Knopf                                "Alas, poor Schoenberg; whose     
| SCO Consulting Services			   aesthetic is perhaps too fine to be
| uunet!sco!rogerk  or  rogerk@sco.com       caught in the gross colander of mass
| 408-425-7222 (voice) 408-458-4227 (fax)    appreciation." --Karl P. Henning


-- 
bill davidsen - davidsen@sixhub.uucp (uunet!crdgw1!sixhub!davidsen)
    sysop *IX BBS and Public Access UNIX
    moderator of comp.binaries.ibm.pc and 80386 mailing list
"Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me