Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!rutgers!mit-eddie!jbs
From: jbs@mit-eddie.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.sources.wanted,comp.unix.wizards,comp.unix.questions
Subject: Re: UUCP Port Turnaround (==> Unix Kernel hacks)
Message-ID: <4891@mit-eddie.MIT.EDU>
Date: Thu, 19-Feb-87 16:36:47 EST
Article-I.D.: mit-eddi.4891
Posted: Thu Feb 19 16:36:47 1987
Date-Received: Fri, 20-Feb-87 21:31:37 EST
References: <171@ndmath.UUCP> <4090@nsc.nsc.com> <166@piaget.UUCP>
Reply-To: jbs@eddie.MIT.EDU (Jeff Siegal)
Organization: MIT, EE/CS Computer Facilities, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 16
Xref: watmath comp.sources.wanted:574 comp.unix.wizards:1037 comp.unix.questions:1105

In article <395@stracs.cs.strath.ac.uk> jim@cs.strath.ac.uk writes:
>I recall someone from CMU saying
>that their development kernel had a 700K text segment!
>
>The MACH kernel source might be prettier, but can we afford the extra core
>needed to run it? :-)

4Mbytes of MicroVAX memory is available for well under $2K.  Memory
prices for other systems are likely to be similar.

While large size may be interpreted (correctly or incorrectly) as poor
design, arguing against something because of its size (measured in K
bytes) seems silly, especially when additional (useful) features (like
improved maintainability) are involved.

Jeff Siegal