Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!usc!ucsd!nosc!crash!nusdecs!rwhite
From: rwhite@nusdecs.uucp (0257014-Robert White(140))
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: SysV.3 to SysV.4 binary compatibility.
Message-ID: <1990Nov7.010943.29084@nusdecs.uucp>
Date: 7 Nov 90 01:09:43 GMT
References: <1990Oct29.213256.15747@ico.isc.com> <1990Oct31.120517.4892@nstar.uucp> <1990Oct31.204646.27825@ico.isc.com>
Organization: National University San Diego
Lines: 21

In article <1990Oct31.204646.27825@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>No he didn't.  In fact, I asked Dick about it; he claims that not only did
>he *not* say that, he can't imagine why it would be so.  He made some vague
>hand-wavy argument that if the program's already linked and all, the size
>of the code and data ought to be pretty well tied down.  I dunno.

Here is a WAG for you.

In my SVR3.2.1 there is a shell program that gets run around any
XENIX executables.  It does some cleanup on the arg types where
there were compatibility problems.

The same thing seems like a likely possibility for any SVR4 that
whants to run SVR3 stuff but that has some problem with something
spesific.

That would make it take more memory.

Rob.

Like I said, just a WAG. (I smell a disclaimer ;-)