Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!uflorida!mephisto!udel!princeton!cs!nfs
From: nfs@cs.Princeton.EDU (Norbert Schlenker)
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: PAX under Minix
Summary: It should fit
Message-ID: <705@rossignol.Princeton.EDU>
Date: 29 Jun 90 16:08:35 GMT
References: <7037@star.cs.vu.nl> <meulenbr.646668063@cst>
Sender: news@cs.Princeton.EDU
Organization: Dept. of Computer Science, Princeton University
Lines: 21

In article <meulenbr.646668063@cst> meulenbr@cst.philips.nl (Frans Meulenbroeks) writes:
>Note that an implementation of pax once appeared in comp.sources.unix
>(volume 17, early '89).
>I don't know how conformant it is.
>I remember that it was big, so perhaps it won't fit in 64k.

I was a beta tester for PAX 2.0.  Mark Colburn received quite a bit of
comment regarding the package, mostly proposals for altered functionality.
It was not clear that this was allowed by Posix, and I don't know what he
plans to do with the proposals.

Under Minix (I think 1.4b with Bruce Evans' protected mode patches - this
was last year), the program compiled and ran with minor tweaks.  I sent
the appropriate cdiffs, about 20K in all, back to Mark Colburn but have
absolutely no idea whether he has incorporated them in subsequent
revisions.  I have no idea when a final version will be ready.

In summary, I think PAX will run under PC Minix.  There simply isn't enough
code to push it over 64K, methinks.

Norbert