badtrk,awk,df all hang a 386SX system.

[W. Paul Zola]

In article <2302 at sixhub.UUCP> davidsen at sixhub.UUCP (bill davidsen) writes:
}In article <11203 at scorn.sco.COM> rogerk (Roger Knopf 5502) writes:
}
}| You don't say what machine you are putting this on but I remember
}| we put support for at least the Compaq SX machine into release
}| 2.2.3. This may be applicable to all SX machines. Not a guarantee,
}| just a dim remembrance.
}
}  Okay, I have to ask... there was a big discussion of how to tell an SX
}from a DX, and no one came up with anything which would work with all
}combinations of cache, etc.
}
}  Now if it's that hard to tell the diference, just what did SCO do to
}"support" Compaq's SX, unless it's seriously non-AT style. I've run old
}versions of Xenix/386 and even ancient version of x/286 on an SX, and
}never had a problem, even with bizarre no-name clones.

[deleted]

The problem with the Compaq "Panther" P9 386sx had, as I recall, 
something to do with the motherboard design, rather than with the
fact that it used a 386sx chip.  In other words, this issue (and
the fix) were specific to that particular model of Compaq rather
than to 386sx chips in general.

To the best of my knowledge, there are no generic issues with
running any SCO '386 product on a 386sx chip.  Of course, there may
be problems with a particular manufacturer's motherboard, just as 
there are problems with motherboards using 386dx chips.

I hope this clears things up.

	-paulz

-
Paul Zola			Software Support Engineer 
				paulz at sco.COM 
We only know in theory what we are doing.   - Kate Bush
DISCLAIMER: I speak for myself, and not for SCO.