Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!bloom-beacon!oberon!bbn!uwmcsd1!marque!ddsw1!gryphon!richard
From: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st
Subject: Re: is Minix available for Atari 1040 ST?
Message-ID: <1492@gryphon.CTS.COM>
Date: Thu, 10-Sep-87 23:36:52 EDT
Article-I.D.: gryphon.1492
Posted: Thu Sep 10 23:36:52 1987
Date-Received: Sat, 12-Sep-87 16:36:44 EDT
References: <168@wright.EDU> <6080@prls.UUCP> <1841@ucbcad.berkeley.edu>
Reply-To: richard@gryphon.CTS.COM (Richard Sexton)
Organization: Trailing Edge Technology, Redondo Beach, CA
Lines: 25
Keywords: Minix

In article <1841@ucbcad.berkeley.edu> davidh@cad.Berkeley.EDU.UUCP (David S. Harrison) writes:
>In article <6080@prls.UUCP> gert@prls.UUCP (Gert Slavenburg) writes:
>>Now if we can get the manpower organized to put X-windows V11 on top of 
>>Minix we will have a multi process, Unix compatible, windowing O.S. the
>>source of which is fully available ! Proposal to that effect follows.
>
>I am afraid such a proposal is not practical.  The size of the executable
>server for X version 10 (on a VAX) is 110k and normally consumes about
>2MB of virtual space when running.  A version 11 server is bound to be 
>larger.  Unless you are proposing a small subset,  I am not sure
>we will ever see X on a machine with 64k processes (or 128k split I&D).

Not only that, but we've seen a *terrible* performence degradation
with under 'X', compared to just using native system calls.

NeWS anyone ?
>
>					David Harrison

-- 
Richard J. Sexton
INTERNET:     richard@gryphon.CTS.COM
UUCP:         {hplabs!hp-sdd, sdcsvax, ihnp4, nosc}!crash!gryphon!richard

"It's too dark to put the key in my ignition..."