From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <dd6fe68a0909011659r1700772fh291c6447ecb9569c@mail.gmail.com>
References: <dd6fe68a0909011622l20f9e6abv2f3ebf75254b3e1e@mail.gmail.com>
	<a3d8f244f00be51b2b9f80895be0be93@quanstro.net>
	<dd6fe68a0909011659r1700772fh291c6447ecb9569c@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue,  1 Sep 2009 20:18:28 -0400
Message-ID: <9ab217670909011718j33c3fac7gd98a1ccf8655eeb6@mail.gmail.com>
From: "Devon H. O'Dell" <devon.odell@gmail.com>
To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Subject: Re: [9fans] lowest valid stack address
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 5dfe1420-ead5-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

2009/9/1 Russ Cox <rsc@swtch.com>:
>> aside: from the overcommit vm discussion.
>> in http://9fans.net/archive/2000/06/634 rob
>> says that plan 9 doesn't overcommit vm.
>> what's the history here?
>
> i think plan 9 does overcommit vm and did then too.

It very much so does.

--dho

> russ
>
>