Article View: comp.sys.atari.st
Article #24392Re: Forwarded message (MINIX)
From: Wolfgang Rupprecht
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1987 16:22
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 1987 16:22
17 lines
1327 bytes
1327 bytes
In article <> jec@iuvax.indiana.EDU writes:
> Okay, I give up. How in the world do you do a fork() without
>some sort of MMU.
Running without an MMU is clearly a loser. I believe that you can
still have a fork(), however, it you don't mind running at a snail's
pace.
What you can do is take a snapshot of the process at fork time, and
send this copy off to swap space. In this manner you never end up
having more than one process on core at any time. All non-running
processes will be swapped out. No address translation is required
since no two processes will ever be co-resident.
Now, if only one could protect kernal address space from corruption...
--
Wolfgang Rupprecht {harvard|decvax!cca|mit-eddie}!lmi-angel!wsr
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<101@lmi-angel.UUCP>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!necntc!adelie!mirror!cca!lmi-angel!wsrReferences:
<2771@mit-hermes.AI.MIT.EDU>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!utzoo!mnetor!seismo!husc6!necntc!adelie!mirror!cca!lmi-angel!wsr From: wsr@lmi-angel.UUCP (Wolfgang Rupprecht) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Forwarded message (MINIX) Message-ID: <101@lmi-angel.UUCP> Date: Fri, 9-Jan-87 11:22:13 EST Article-I.D.: lmi-ange.101 Posted: Fri Jan 9 11:22:13 1987 Date-Received: Sun, 11-Jan-87 22:40:24 EST References: <2771@mit-hermes.AI.MIT.EDU> Reply-To: wsr@lmi-angel.UUCP (Wolfgang Rupprecht) Organization: LISP Machine, Inc (Cambridge Engineering HQ) Lines: 17