Received: (from major@localhost)
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) id LAA15035
	for pups-liszt; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:32:11 +1100 (EST)
Received: from europe.std.com (europe.std.com [199.172.62.20])
	by minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id LAA15024
	for <pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au>; Thu, 18 Feb 1999 11:31:45 +1100 (EST)
Received: from world.std.com by europe.std.com (STD1.2/BZS-8-1.0)
	id TAA08273; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:31:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: by world.std.com (TheWorld/Spike-2.0)
	id AA13305; Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:31:41 -0500
Date: Wed, 17 Feb 1999 19:31:41 -0500
From: allisonp@world.std.com (Allison J Parent)
Message-Id: <199902180031.AA13305@world.std.com>
To: pups@minnie.cs.adfa.oz.au
Subject: Re: 2.11BSD, non-split i/d issues
Sender: owner-pups@minnie.cs.adfa.edu.au
Precedence: bulk

<As already mentioned in previous messages, I'm working on getting
<2.9BSD onto a Pro 350.  I'm using 2.9BSD as a starting point because
<it claims to support machines without split i/d.  The 350 uses the
<F-11 chipset, which I have read does not support split i/d.

The F11 does not do I&D split but does have user/system.  

<I would prefer to use 2.11BSD because I understand it's still actively
<used, and not as buggy as 2.9.  But everything I've read about 2.11BSD
<says that it needs split i/d to run.  Can anyone give me more detail
<about this?  Was support for machines without split i/d removed from
<the kernel, or is it just that some of the programs are too big to fit
<in a single 64k segment?

It's my understanding that 2.11 will run on F11 systems (pro350 and 11/23)
if properly configured but the only binaries loose are for split I&D.
So if properly configured you can get 2.11 to utilize the user/system
spaces.

Allison