*BSD News Article 38992


Return to BSD News archive

Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msunews!caen!usenet.coe.montana.edu!bsd.coe.montana.edu!nate
From: nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu (Nate Williams)
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.bugs
Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.0R fails on npx 387
Date: 6 Dec 1994 18:12:59 GMT
Organization: Montana State University, Bozeman  Montana
Lines: 29
Message-ID: <3c29jb$mif@pdq.coe.montana.edu>
References: <T54mwc2w165w@oasys.pc.my> <3brhji$apt@pdq.coe.montana.edu> <3bviv1$28p@idefix.eunet.fi>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bsd.coe.montana.edu

In article <3bviv1$28p@idefix.eunet.fi>,
Bror 'Count' Heinola <count@snafu.muncca.fi> wrote:
>In article <3brhji$apt@pdq.coe.montana.edu>,
>Nate Williams <nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu> wrote:

>>>I recalled that the FreeBSD 1.1.5 also had problems with some
>>>motherboards with 387.
>>
>>Hmm, never heard of any problems with FreeBSD and x87 chips of any
>>kinds.  However, there *were* problems with the alternative FPU emulator
>>which required some kernel programs to be rebuilt due to some kernel
>>structures being aligned differently.
>
>	Then you haven't been listening hard enough. I know that I've
>	reported a few times that FreeBSD didn't work with my 386SX/
>	IIT 387SX combination.

Ahh, I had assumed 387 == Intel 387.  All I know is that certain 387
clones work, and others don't.  Which ones work and which don't I can't
remember anymore, and my article implied that all 387 worked, when I
meant all Intel 387s.  Sorry for the confusion.


Nate
-- 
nate@bsd.coe.montana.edu     |  FreeBSD dude and all around tech.
nate@cs.montana.edu          |  weenie.
work #: (406) 994-4836       |  Unemployed, looking for permanant work in
home #: (406) 586-0579       |  CS/EE field.