Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!ucsd!sdcsvax!ucsdhub!esosun!seismo!uunet!pcrat!rick
From: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.microport
Subject: Re: Is microport really gone?
Keywords: 386 compatibility, a way out
Message-ID: <694@pcrat.UUCP>
Date: 5 Mar 89 15:20:12 GMT
References: <14578@quacky.mips.COM> <598@pmafire.UUCP>
Reply-To: rick@pcrat.UUCP (Rick Richardson)
Organization: PC Research, Inc., Tinton Falls, NJ
Lines: 29

In article <598@pmafire.UUCP> dave@pmafire.UUCP (Dave Remien) writes:
>In article <14578@quacky.mips.COM> menna@mips.COM (Randy Menna) writes:
>>But, (there's always a but), will my binary applications
>>for microport 386 run on interactive 386.
>
>I've run lots of Microport and Bell Tech compiled binaries under AT&T's
>3.2 System V/386; all worked perfectly.

This is mostly, but not 100%, true.  I suppose it could be true
for uPort and Bell Tech binaries, but it is not the case that all
Interactive 1.0.6 binaries will work under Interactive 2.0 (a.k.a. V.3.2).

My counter example is EGA-wanderer, which I recently hacked
for 1.0.6.  Also, an EGA graphics library I built for 1.0.6.
Neither continues to work under 2.0.  The worst part is, the
documentation is so poor for the console display that I can't
even begin to figure out what the changes should be in order
to make this stuff work under 2.0.

I think you are probably safe as long as you don't depend upon
the behavior of any of the device drivers, including display,
keyboard, vt, and probably asy.  To my mind, that means anything
that is even close to being as sexy as most DOS applications.

-- 
Rick Richardson | JetRoff "di"-troff to LaserJet Postprocessor|uunet!pcrat!dry2
PC Research,Inc.| Mail: uunet!pcrat!jetroff; For anon uucp do:|for Dhrystone 2
uunet!pcrat!rick| uucp jetroff!~jetuucp/file_list ~nuucp/.    |submission forms.
jetroff Wk2200-0300,Sa,Su ACU {2400,PEP} 12013898963 "" \d\r\d ogin: jetuucp