A3000UX applications
Tony Cleverley
ajc at root.co.uk
Wed Apr 10 21:01:36 AEST 1991
In <1991Apr9.063955.12000 at cunixf.cc.columbia.edu> es1 at cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Ethan Solomita) writes:
>In article <2671 at root44.co.uk> khh at root.co.uk (Keith Holder) writes:
>>We have an Amiga in the office running Commodore's 1.1 version of
>>System VR4 and I would say that it is not ABI compliant. We also
>>have various other 68030 machines running V.4 from Motorola and
>>binaries taken from these machines and run on the Amiga box
>>result in core dumps. Looking at various header files on the
>>Amiga and comparing them against the Motorola 68k ABI, I think
>>that they have quite a way to go before they are ABI compatible.
> There is some other problem because AMIX is ABI
>compliant.
I think you are wrong as far as I can see the AMIGA 3000 UX is not compliant,
for example:
The current ABI defines the structure sigaction (see sys/signal.h)
to be:
struct sigaction {
void (*sa_handler)();
sigset_t sa_mask;
int sa_flags;
}
yet the AMIGA defines it as:
struct sigaction {
int sa_flags;
void (*sa_handler)();
sigset_t sa_mask;
int sa_resv[2];
}
Also the online manual page for sigaction on the AMIGA states:
The sigaction structure includes the following members:
void (*sa_handler)();
sigset_t sa_mask;
int sa_flags;
There is no mention of int sa_resv[2];
>Also, I don't seem to remember hearing about a version
>1.1, just 1.0, although I could be wrong about that.
On the AMIGA we have here, uname -a gives
UNIX_Sytem_V localhost 4.0 1.1 Amiga m68020
This could be wrong though as the sytem here has a m68030 running at 25MHz.
Tony Cleverley
Obviously, these are my opinions and do not reflect the opinions of my
employers who just so happen to produce a version of V.4 for the Motorola 68k.
Tony Cleverley, Systems Engineer, UniSoft Ltd.
<ajc at root.co.uk> G1ITH Fax: (071) 729 3273
Phone: +44 71 729 3773
More information about the Comp.unix.amiga
mailing list