Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!munnari.oz.au!bruce!cechew
From: cechew@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU (Earl Chew)
Newsgroups: comp.os.misc
Subject: Re: Coherent Vs. Minix
Message-ID: <3544@bruce.cs.monash.OZ.AU>
Date: 7 Jan 91 02:32:27 GMT
References: <19954@netcom.UUCP> <82q9u3w163w@halcyon.uucp>
Organization: Monash Uni. Computer Science, Australia
Lines: 16

In <82q9u3w163w@halcyon.uucp> halcyon!grendel@sumax.seattleu.edu (Grendel) writes:

>feustel@netcom.UUCP (David Feustel) writes:

>Isn't it sort of a one or the other choice? =) Doesn't Minix have a 64k 
>limit on executables like Coherent does?

Vanilla IBM-PC Minix has this limit. When patched with any of the 32-bit patch
kits, Minix-386 doesn't have this limit (there may be other restrictions
depending on the patch kit you use). (Minix 68k doesn't have this limit either.)

Earl
-- 
Earl Chew, Dept of Computer Science, Monash University, Australia 3168
EMAIL: cechew@bruce.cs.monash.edu.au PHONE: 03 5655447 FAX: 03 5655146
----------------------------------------------------------------------