Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!im4u!ut-sally!ut-emx!juniper!bigtex!qiclab!catlabs!neighorn
From: neighorn@catlabs.UUCP (Steven C. Neighorn)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Re: uPort 386
Message-ID: <516@catlabs.UUCP>
Date: 16 Apr 88 22:37:31 GMT
References: <929@xn.LL.MIT.EDU> <7602@agate.BERKELEY.EDU>
Reply-To: neighorn@catlabs.UUCP (Steven C. Neighorn)
Organization: SCN Research, Portland Oregon
Lines: 24
Posted: Sat Apr 16 17:37:31 1988

In article <7602@agate.BERKELEY.EDU> ewv@violet.berkeley.edu (Eric Varsanyi) writes:
>In article <929@xn.LL.MIT.EDU> singer@XN.LL.MIT.EDU (Matthew R. Singer) writes:
>>1)  Can the 386 system compile for a 286 machine (Large model)?
>No, the supplied compiler cannot produces 286 executables. The system does
>seem to be able to run COFF 286 executables.
>
With the following expections from my 'running 286 binaries on V/386' days:

1) Unify's Microport 286 version of Accell (The development environment). Most
of the RDBMS stuff worked Ok, but trying anything fancy with Accell resulted
in a 500k(!) core file.

2) A ported version of Sendmail 5.51. "ioctl" problems here, and the venerable 
'not a typewriter' error we have all grown to love and cherish.

3) The Dataflex DB compiler. The rest of Dataflex works fine, but we have to
keep a uport 286 system hanging around to compile new Dataflex stuff.

#1 and #2 were fixed by getting a new version/recompiling. #3 is still a sore
spot.
-- 
Steven C. Neighorn    ...!tektronix!{psu-cs,reed,ogcvax}!qiclab!catlabs!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"