Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uwm.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!tank!gargoyle!chinet!les From: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) Newsgroups: comp.databases Subject: Re: 386 unix vs. 286 xenix unify Message-ID: <1990Mar1.170952.7880@chinet.chi.il.us> Date: 1 Mar 90 17:09:52 GMT References: <1990Feb13.040254.7988@chinet.chi.il.us> Reply-To: les@chinet.chi.il.us (Leslie Mikesell) Distribution: na Organization: Chinet - Chicago Public Access UNIX Lines: 32 In article reg@unify.UUCP (Russell Grau) writes: >>Can anyone tell me if it is possible to run a '286 Xenix executable >>linked with the unify libraries under '386 unix SysVr3? >According to the SCO Xenix System V manual "C Language Guide" pages 2-4 and >2-5 it should be possible. You would need to link with the -Ml and -M2 options >so the code that would be produced would be 80286 code. >The default for the 386 compiler is to produce the 80386 instruction set. >This would explain why it would appear not to like your 286 code. I have AT&T unix SysVr3.2, not Xenix for the 386. Is there a way to convince its loader to handle the xenix library files? >In the meantime, the code should work as is. Your user could try the >switch and if it appears to work he would definitely be better off. The >reason for this is that he has a 386 machine running 286 code. Not quite >as efficient in the use of the CPU. The applications that are straight unify code work fine. The program that has a problem runs up to a point where a number is typed in (possibly a floating point emulation problem in the 'C' portion of the code). The problem with upgrading is that the application depends on quirks in an old '286 version (or as they put it: "works around bugs") and wouldn't run when they tried to upgrade to a newer 286 version some time ago so they expect the same from the current '386 version. The original programmer is no longer around and no one wants to tackle modifications beyond recompiling the C code and re-linking if that is possible. Performance isn't really an issue. Les Mikesell les@chinet.chi.il.us