Date: Mon, 8 Sep 1997 14:45:42 +0200 (MET DST) From: Eivind Eklund <perhaps@yes.no> To: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> Cc: joe@pavilion.net, doconnor@ist.flinders.edu.au, freebsd-chat@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Divert sockets.. Message-ID: <199709081245.OAA29626@bitbox.follo.net> In-Reply-To: "Jordan K. Hubbard"'s message of Mon, 08 Sep 1997 02:33:56 -0700 References: <19970908081913.36000@pavilion.net> <24706.873711236@time.cdrom.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
[Josef Karthauser <joe@pavilion.net>] > > That's not entirely true. Is it? The 4000 had memory protection and the > > same O/S. (a500 ran 68000, a4000 ran 68030/40). [Jordan K. Hubbard] > It didn't matter - the way the AmigaDOS service calling conventions > were designed, you needed to be able to share memory trivially (and > unprotectedly) with the OS so ye old Guru Meditation was still a > frequent visitor even with a 68040 chip inside. This is actually not quite correct. AmigaOS was partially designed to allow a fairly high level of memory protection, but unfortunately some parts allocated by user programs would still have to be publicly available. And nobody bothered to specify which parts that was. A real pity; most of the Amiga architecture was beautiful. (LOTS of it was better than Unix, IMHO) Eivind.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199709081245.OAA29626>