Return to BSD News archive
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!bunyip.cc.uq.oz.au!munnari.oz.au!news.Hawaii.Edu!ames!hookup!swrinde!sgiblab!pacbell.com!toad.com!curt From: curt@mofo.emergent.com (Curt mayer) Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.development Subject: Re: Answer to question on the virtual machine (really Jmonroy) Message-ID: <50252@toad.com> Date: 31 May 94 23:22:53 GMT Sender: news@toad.com Organization: Mofo Lines: 29 Nntp-Posting-Host: mofo.toad.com In article <AAROND.94May31105253@twolf.StorTek.com> Aaron Dailey writes: >In article <jmonroyCqnJF8.3I8@netcom.com> Jesus Monroy Jr writes: > > Information has it that some lower end 386 chips don't > have the VM on board. Other information is that > some 386-clone makers also are not adding the VM support. > > All this information is unconfirmed at this time. > It was passed to me by another (well-qualifed) source. > >I can't imagine CPU clone makers not including v8086 mode - I'm not >saying it's possible, but it would just seem like a stupid move to >introduce an incompatability. > Looks like the Electronic Village Idiot has struck again. his signal to noise ratio remains pegged at 0%. the internet is growing so fast that there will always be new users that try to converse with this fool, but they soon learn. Geeze. maybe a FAQ could fix that. Once upon a time, I thought that maybe jmonroy was a clever denial-of-service attack on 386bsd by microsoft or usl. but no, he`s too erratic for that. never explain by malice what could be attributed to stupidity. welcome to my kill file, gibbering lunatic. -- curt mayer curt@toad.com 415-387-0217 home