Return to BSD News archive
Xref: sserve comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit:4103 comp.unix.bsd:12449 comp.os.linux:53408 comp.unix.questions:37922 comp.os.mach:3188 comp.unix.solaris:5639 Newsgroups: comp.unix.pc-clone.32bit,comp.unix.bsd,comp.os.linux,comp.unix.questions,comp.os.mach,comp.unix.solaris Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!newsserver.jvnc.net!newsserver.egr.uri.edu!black From: black@cs.uri.edu (John Black) Subject: Re: Unix close for 486 - commens requested Message-ID: <CByvHr.AMJ@egr.uri.edu> Sender: John Black Organization: Computer Science Department, University of Rhode Island References: <23r8kl$la4@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <CBAs9D.MH4@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <hastyCBvJrI.CMy@netcom.com> Distribution: inet Date: Wed, 18 Aug 1993 18:03:26 GMT Lines: 21 It's possible to have too much machine. I'm sitting on a Gateway 2000 4DX2-66V that was purchased to run LynxOS. Its got a fancy VESA local bus, fast hard drive, zippy video card, and runs Windows 3.1 like greased lightning. It can't even load Lynx though, because...well, nobody really knows. If I cripple the machine by diabling cache, turbo, IDE block mode, etc., it will sometimes boot Lynx, but usually not. It's interesting (to me anyway...) that in the newly formed LynxOS mailing list where this issue has been discussed a bit no one has reported problems with plain vanilla ISA bus machines. Further, the June '93 issue of Byte magazine reported on "fast 486 machines" and their ability to run SCO UNIX -- several of them had problems similar to mine, and in at least one case the solution was to cripple the machine as I've had to do. In my case, a generic '486 would have been better than my whiz-bang clone-of-the-month special, at least for running something other than MS-DOS/Windows. John Black black@cs.uri.edu