Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!killer!chasm
From: chasm@killer.DALLAS.TX.US (Charles Marslett)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: PC Minix/64KB limit
Summary: No, Paul, there really is a 376!
Message-ID: <7246@killer.DALLAS.TX.US>
Date: 20 Feb 89 13:13:17 GMT
References: <8752@louie.udel.EDU> <2047@ast.cs.vu.nl> <419@bilver.UUCP> <3576@mit-amt>
Organization: The Unix(R) Connection, Dallas, Texas
Lines: 16

In article <3576@mit-amt>, pshen@mit-atrp.UUCP (Paul Shen) writes:
> In article <419@bilver.UUCP> wbeebe@bilver.UUCP (bill beebe) writes:
> >.....
> >For your information I have decided to *investigate* porting Minix
> >to the 80376 (no real mode, no paging). The 80376 comes up in protected
>            ^                                    ^
>  I guess that is just a typo. They should be 80386. Am I right?

Nope, the 80376 (note, 10 LESS than 80386) is a 386 minus paging hardware,
and minus real mode -- crippled so as not to be usable as a PC clone processor
and probably noticably simpler inside.  It is, I think, Intel's trial balloon
to see if they can break from the 8088 tradition. . .  If they had only left
out segments rather than paging, I'd have been pleased as punch.

Charles Marslett
chasm@killer.dallas.tx.us