Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!agate!darkstar!saturn.ucsc.edu!golding
From: golding@saturn.ucsc.edu (Richard A. Golding)
Newsgroups: comp.os.os2
Subject: Re: overlays in 32-bit OS/2
Keywords: Virtual Memory 80386
Message-ID: <3014@darkstar.ucsc.edu>
Date: 3 May 90 00:56:36 GMT
References: <1990Apr27.155908.4260@geac.com> <273@caslon.cs.arizona.edu> <4401@plains.UUCP> <11790@portia.Stanford.EDU> <4416@plains.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@darkstar.ucsc.edu
Organization: University of California, Santa Cruz
Lines: 27

In article <4416@plains.UUCP> harlow@plains.UUCP (Jay B. Harlow) writes:
>
>I know Microsoft knows about Multics, OS/2 is patterned after it, unix
>is also.   rumor has it ;-)

Microsoft is quite a number of people, some of whom know about Multics,
some of whom don't.  OS/2 isn't really patterned after Multics; it's
just that almost all uniprocessor operating systems written since the
early 1970's have been significantly influenced by Multics.  Only
recently have there been operating systems developed which break with
the Multics model in lots of significant ways, and most of those are
distributed systems.  It's more reasonable to say that OS/2 is
patterned after Unix, since that is the competition MS is trying to
beat.  (E.g. consider longnames.)

I agree that the decision to support only a single flat address space
is regrettable when compared with an ideal system, but there were some
very good reasons to make the decision.  Consider trying to make a
segmented system completely Posix compatible -- and the money that
Posix compatibility implies -- and the decision is understandable.

-richard
--
-----------
Richard A. Golding, Crucible (work) and UC Santa Cruz CIS Board (grad student)
Internet:  golding@cis.ucsc.edu   Work: {uunet|ucscc}!cruc!golding
Post: Baskin Centre for CE & IS, Appl. Sci. Bldg., UC, Santa Cruz CA 95064