On Wednesday 14 June 2006 00:50, Johnny Billquist wrote:
> Per Fogelstrvm wrote:
> > On Tuesday 13 June 2006 14:23, Rick Kelly wrote:
> >>Johnny Billquist said:
> There's actually a cheesy way to do demand paging with microprocessors
> that don't support demand paging (such as the original
L PROTECTED]>,
> Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> =?ISO-8859-1?Q?H=E1morszky_Bal=E1zs?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
> misc@openbsd.org, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org,
> [EMAIL PROTECTED]
&g
Per Fogelstrvm wrote:
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 14:23, Rick Kelly wrote:
Johnny Billquist said:
There's actually a cheesy way to do demand paging with microprocessors
that don't support demand paging (such as the original 68000--another
"16 bit" machine). The way to do this is to run two proce
On Tuesday 13 June 2006 14:23, Rick Kelly wrote:
> Johnny Billquist said:
> >> There's actually a cheesy way to do demand paging with microprocessors
> >> that don't support demand paging (such as the original 68000--another
> >> "16 bit" machine). The way to do this is to run two processors in
>
Johnny Billquist said:
>> There's actually a cheesy way to do demand paging with microprocessors
>> that don't support demand paging (such as the original 68000--another
>> "16 bit" machine). The way to do this is to run two processors in parallel
>> but skewed by one instruction. If the first o
ne 12, 2006 1:15 PM
> > > > To: Ted Mittelstaedt; Nikolas Britton; Ted Unangst
> > > > Cc: Hamorszky Balazs; misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org;
> > > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Subject: RE: wikipedia article
> > > >
> >
;
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: wikipedia article
On Nov 1, 6:11pm, "Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote:
}
} Prior to the release of the 80386 the Intel processors didn't have
} memory protection which was a requirement of any processor running
} the BSD kernel.
This is not entirely t
Marcus Watts wrote:
Various wrote:
From: Otto Moerbeek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
What's more, iirc the MMU of the pdp11 isn't what we call a MMU today,
it could not even do paging.
The pdp-11 mmu could handle program relocation, segmentation (after
a
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 01:14:57PM -0700, John Nemeth wrote:
> The 80386 was the first
x86
> processor with paging (which all modern virtual
> memory systems are based around) and 32 bits.
-is
That qualifies as the answer of the day.
My hat goes off to you. :-D
Johnny
Thor Lancelot Simon wrote:
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:27:33PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
What was the bit size of the CPU's originally used to write UNIX in Bell
Labs?
Rather large. You can get all the
Various wrote:
> From: Otto Moerbeek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
...
> > What was the bit size of the CPU's originally used to write UNIX in Bell
> > Labs?
>
> What's more, iirc the MMU of the pdp11 isn't what we call a MMU today,
> it could not even do paging.
>-Original Message-
>From: Thor Lancelot Simon [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 10:35 PM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt
>Cc: misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: wikipedia article
>
>
>On Mon, Jun 12,
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org;
> >[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >Subject: RE: wikipedia article
> >
> >
> >On Nov 1, 6:11pm, "Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote:
> >}
> >} Prior to the release of the 80386 the Intel processors didn't have
> >} memory protection
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:27:33PM -0700, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
>
> What was the bit size of the CPU's originally used to write UNIX in Bell
> Labs?
Rather large. You can get all the details at
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnetic_core.
--
Thor Lancelot Simon
>-Original Message-
>From: John Nemeth [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 1:15 PM
>To: Ted Mittelstaedt; Nikolas Britton; Ted Unangst
>Cc: Hamorszky Balazs; misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: RE: wikipedia
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Thor
>Lancelot Simon
>Sent: Monday, June 12, 2006 11:48 AM
>To: Dale Rahn
>Cc: misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: wikipedia article
&
ECTED]; Hamorszky Balazs;
>freedos-user@lists.sourceforge.net; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED];
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
>Subject: Re: wikipedia article
>
>
>On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
>
>[SNIP]
>> * IIRC N
Could this discussion please be moved to the Wikipedia discussion
pages?
* Constantine A. Murenin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-06-12 15:07]:
> On 11/06/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
> >http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
>
> Whilst there, what about another impo
On 11/06/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
Whilst there, what about another important article that seems to have
a Linux POV?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki
On Nov 1, 6:11pm, "Ted Mittelstaedt" wrote:
}
} Prior to the release of the 80386 the Intel processors didn't have
} memory protection which was a requirement of any processor running
} the BSD kernel.
This is not entirely true. The 80286 had memory protection.
However, its memory protecti
ticular application.
If the wikipedia article helps people determine suitability for a
purpose then it's worthwhile. The history is already out there, and can
be included or merely linked to.
--
Darrin Chandler| Phoenix BSD Users Group
[EMAIL PROTECTED] | http:/
On Mon, Jun 12, 2006 at 10:23:06AM -0400, Dale Rahn wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:18:55PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote:
> > On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > >
> > >* IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD
> >
> > that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first
On Sun, Jun 11, 2006 at 10:18:55PM -0700, Ted Unangst wrote:
> On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >* IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD
>
> that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd
> release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release.
>
On Sun, 11 Jun 2006, Nikolas Britton wrote:
[SNIP]
> * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD, OpenBSD was a fork of NetBSD.
Eeh? I believe NetBSD was there half a year before FreeBSD.
Bye,
Mipam.
>-Original Message-
>From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Behalf Of Nikolas Britton
>Sent: Sunday, June 11, 2006 10:46 PM
>To: Ted Unangst
>Cc: Hamorszky Balazs; misc@openbsd.org; freebsd-questions@freebsd.org;
>[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>Subject: Re: wikipe
On 6/12/06, Ted Unangst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> * IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD
that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd
release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release.
Yes as many others
On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
* IIRC NetBSD was a fork of FreeBSD
that's an interesting theory when you consider that the first netbsd
release came out 8 months before the first freebsd release.
On 6/11/06, Nikolas Britton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
> THX!
>
What kind of help are you looking for
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
THX!
What kind of help are you looking for?
--
BSD Podcasts @:
http://bsdtalk.blogspot.com/
http://freeb
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi!
I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
THX!
where can i download openbsd ia-64? lighttpd is the only other web
server that runs on openbsd? is t
ok. i won't tell you :)
but i'm pleased to hear your opinion.
Thanks!
knitti wrote:
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
I think this is an exercis
On 6/11/06, Hamorszky Balazs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
I think this is an exercise in futility, for staying up-to-date, for
trying to be
unbiased and non-arbitrary.
wh
Hi!
I'm looking for some help on an article on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_open_source_operating_systems
THX!
Chris Zakelj wrote:
Jan Izary wrote:
Recently I and several other people have worked to improve the OpenBSD
article contained in the Wikipedia, I'm sure I need not explain how it
works.
Anyways, I've worked to get as much easily accessable information
regarding OpenBSD in that article as poss
Jan Izary wrote:
> Recently I and several other people have worked to improve the OpenBSD
> article contained in the Wikipedia, I'm sure I need not explain how it
> works.
>
> Anyways, I've worked to get as much easily accessable information
> regarding OpenBSD in that article as possible and I've
On 06/10/05, Jan Izary <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Recently I and several other people have worked to improve the OpenBSD
> article contained in the Wikipedia, I'm sure I need not explain how it
> works.
>
> Anyways, I've worked to get as much easily accessable information regarding
> OpenBSD in t
Recently I and several other people have worked to improve the OpenBSD
article contained in the Wikipedia, I'm sure I need not explain how it
works.
Anyways, I've worked to get as much easily accessable information regarding
OpenBSD in that article as possible and I've pretty much run into a w
38 matches
Mail list logo
