386 Compatibility

[Netnews Administrator]

In article <8481 at cbnewsm.ATT.COM> dab at cbnewsm.ATT.COM (david.a.berk) writes:
>Assuming an AMI or Phoenix Bios, is there any reason why AT&T UNIX V 3.2
>should or shouldn't work in a 386 SX board (except slower, of course than
>a regular 386 board.)

Unix doesn't use the BIOS, so BIOS compatibility is only an issue if
AMI or Phoenix don't store their CMOS drive table values in the same
place as the AT&T BIOS.  The 6386/SX, 25, and 33 BIOSes are based upon
a Phoenix BIOS.  I don't think this is going to be an issue.

However, I'd watch for other "features" they've implemented on the
motherboard to save you money (:-), or give you performance
"enhancements".  For instance, motherboard VGA and hard disk
controllers won't do you any good if the AT&T drivers don't understand
them.  Ideally, you want to integrate your own hard disk controller
(should be a Western Digital 1003/5/6/7A without a BIOS extension).
VGA doesn't matter much IF the implementation is REGISTER (not BIOS)
compatible with the IBM VGA standard in standard VGA modes.
If it has a RAM cache controller make sure it's based upon the Intel
chip (82385 I believe).

I've heard of AT&T Unix running on Compaq and Everex clones, even
though we don't directly support them.

Good luck,

-- 
Frank McGee, AT&T
Entry Level Systems Support
attmail!fmcgee (preferred)
att!cuuxb!fmcgee (those that can't reach attmail)