Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!think.com!mintaka!spdcc!rbraun
From: rbraun@spdcc.COM (Rich Braun)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.sysv386
Subject: Re: Since Most Everythings's right with SCO Can we make it smaller?
Message-ID: <7395@spdcc.SPDCC.COM>
Date: 24 Apr 91 17:07:03 GMT
Organization: Kronos Inc., Waltham, Mass.
Lines: 19

marc@jahangir.UUCP (Marc Rossner) writes:
>I thought that the advantage of Xenix was that it was supposed to be tiny.
>I also thought that I had a rather massive kernel on my ISC 2.2.  My
>kernel is 750K.  Are you sure you have your numbers right?

Reading this thread, I can't help but to wonder:  why worry about
kernel size, these days?  I've long been one to complain about the fact
that software seems to get larger in direct proportion to the decrease
in memory costs, and often slower due to its increasing complexity, but
in the case of a reasonably well-performing O/S with lots of features,
why worry so much about kernel size?

Add another megabyte to the system and the problem will go away.  Seems
a fairly simple and economical solution.  Even at 1-2Mb, kernels remain
significantly smaller than most applications.  (As compared to ten
years ago on mainframe computers, when a kernel was typically many
times larger than an application.)

-rich