Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!sdd.hp.com!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!decwrl!deccrl!bloom-beacon!eru!hagbard!sunic!mcsun!ukc!pyrltd!root44!ajc
From: ajc@root.co.uk (Tony Cleverley)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.amiga
Subject: Re: A3000UX applications
Keywords: What is ABI and are there any for the A3000UX
Message-ID: <2674@root44.co.uk>
Date: 10 Apr 91 11:01:36 GMT
References: <1522@ewu.UUCP> <2671@root44.co.uk> <1991Apr9.063955.12000@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu>
Organization: UniSoft Ltd., London, England
Lines: 62

In <1991Apr9.063955.12000@cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes:

>In article <2671@root44.co.uk> khh@root.co.uk (Keith Holder) writes:

>>We have an Amiga in the office running Commodore's 1.1 version of
>>System VR4 and I would say that it is not ABI compliant. We also
>>have various other 68030 machines running V.4 from Motorola and
>>binaries taken from these machines and run on the Amiga box
>>result in core dumps. Looking at various header files on the
>>Amiga and comparing them against the Motorola 68k ABI, I think
>>that they have quite a way to go before they are ABI compatible.

>	There is some other problem because AMIX is ABI
>compliant. 

I think you are wrong as far as I can see the AMIGA 3000 UX is not compliant, 
for example:

The current ABI defines the structure sigaction (see sys/signal.h)
to be:

	struct sigaction {
		void (*sa_handler)();
		sigset_t sa_mask;
		int sa_flags;
	}

yet the AMIGA defines it as:

	struct sigaction {
		int sa_flags;
		void (*sa_handler)();
		sigset_t sa_mask;
		int sa_resv[2];
	}

Also the online manual page for sigaction on the AMIGA states:

	The sigaction structure includes the following members:

		void		(*sa_handler)();
		sigset_t	sa_mask;
		int		sa_flags;

There is no mention of int sa_resv[2];

>Also, I don't seem to remember hearing about a version
>1.1, just 1.0, although I could be wrong about that. 

On the AMIGA we have here, uname -a gives 

	UNIX_Sytem_V localhost 4.0 1.1 Amiga m68020

This could be wrong though as the sytem here has a m68030 running at 25MHz.

Tony Cleverley

Obviously, these are my opinions and do not reflect the opinions of my 
employers who just so happen to produce a version of V.4 for the Motorola 68k.
Tony Cleverley, Systems Engineer, UniSoft Ltd.
<ajc@root.co.uk>	G1ITH	Fax:	(071) 729 3273
Phone:	+44 71 729 3773