Article View: comp.sys.amiga.tech
Article #4735Re: MMU + A3000 + AmigaOS2.0 == Non-crashing system?
From: Checkpoint Technologies
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 1990 13:53
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 1990 13:53
15 lines
1334 bytes
1334 bytes
In article <20889@grebyn.com> ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies) writes:
> Therefore, the way to get MMU protection for your applications is to
> abandon application binary compatibility; and if you're going to do
> this anyway, then why not just use Unix?
In article <6303@sugar.hackercorp.com> peter@sugar.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) writes:
>Real-time response?
Valid point. You could choose another appropriate real-time protected
kernel. I hear Mach is nice; I wish I knew more about it.
--
First comes the logo: C H E C K P O I N T T E C H N O L O G I E S / /
\\ / /
Then, the disclaimer: All expressed opinions are, indeed, opinions. \ / o
Now for the witty part: I'm pink, therefore, I'm spam! \/
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<21001@grebyn.com>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!usc!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!grebyn!ckpReferences:
<2489@clinet.FI> <20889@grebyn.com> <6303@sugar.hackercorp.com>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!attcan!uunet!snorkelwacker!usc!sdd.hp.com!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!rpi!uupsi!grebyn!ckp From: ckp@grebyn.com (Checkpoint Technologies) Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.tech Subject: Re: MMU + A3000 + AmigaOS2.0 == Non-crashing system? Message-ID: <21001@grebyn.com> Date: 6 Aug 90 13:53:09 GMT References: <2489@clinet.FI> <20889@grebyn.com> <6303@sugar.hackercorp.com> Reply-To: ckp@grebyn.UUCP (Checkpoint Technologies) Organization: Grebyn Timesharing, Vienna, VA, USA Lines: 15