Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:1440 comp.arch:8147 Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ukma!rutgers!columbia!cs!dupuy From: dupuy@cs.cs.columbia.edu (Alexander Dupuy) Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.arch Subject: Re: Process sizes on the NeXT Message-ID: Date: 7 Feb 89 19:45:42 GMT References: <9013@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <4180@pt.cs.cmu.edu> Sender: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Reply-To: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu Followup-To: comp.arch Distribution: usa Organization: Columbia University Lines: 19 In-reply-to: avie@wb1.cs.cmu.edu's message of 3 Feb 89 04:55:01 GMT In article <4180@pt.cs.cmu.edu> avie@wb1.cs.cmu.edu (Avadis Tevanian) writes: > > /bin/sh allocates 2meg to overcome a problem with restarting instructions > on a 68030 (/bin/sh used to handle SIGSEGV's to extend its break region, > that doesn't work on a 68030). Am I reading this right? I remember that there was a problem with the 68000 (the original) being unable to restart some instructions - that was why you needed a 68010, which allowed you to restart all instructions, if you wanted to have a demand-paged virtual memory system. Is it really true that the 68030 has the same proble the 68000 had? Doesn't sound like progress to me... Please respond by mail - I don't read these groups very regularly. @alex -- -- inet: dupuy@cs.columbia.edu uucp: ...!rutgers!cs.columbia.edu!dupuy