From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HTML_MESSAGE,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 21419 invoked from network); 8 Apr 2021 22:32:03 -0000 Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (45.79.103.53) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 8 Apr 2021 22:32:03 -0000 Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id 74E6D9BB68; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 08:32:00 +1000 (AEST) Received: from minnie.tuhs.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 746719BB66; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 08:31:51 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: minnie.tuhs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="nV0ZE8Mx"; dkim-atps=neutral Received: by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix, from userid 112) id A538A9BB66; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 08:31:49 +1000 (AEST) Received: from mail-qk1-f182.google.com (mail-qk1-f182.google.com [209.85.222.182]) by minnie.tuhs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 00D449BB65 for ; Fri, 9 Apr 2021 08:31:48 +1000 (AEST) Received: by mail-qk1-f182.google.com with SMTP id c3so4014465qkc.5 for ; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:31:48 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=bsdimp-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=c3i324/cOm3HA6Xswn1vZTuIdARxCMbUNARYzCprzM0=; b=nV0ZE8MxDNCxpbDmjOPqUgDLWtVEx35qkLS5KppQA5QCEfKXimQG+BJOKQQ1JHtyNV 0lvwr4eux7j4YXMb8fu/9NKdFSrZBQl5g7doSSDCtPW+bOUlL2XWt0W0VcdxbcXXg2Zi Dl6BaFo3QOzUtEorU+bBKoJB5qJ+9vg3+acZvaLz/OQgYmSzRJI4UnAn9xA0aHoSGnGj m1cmS54Czz1yxa0AG7PhYS5OA3k+z0iq/uIn+fJ2OUBu37DR4TAXNGTq7f7Jj0I1Vjto UZqzcIwvtOck6w4DVbxJe+yIZIxP6xfdCK2SMBCAnB0NLOV/aO8tS4Ha40bx9V85ax6k jbzQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=c3i324/cOm3HA6Xswn1vZTuIdARxCMbUNARYzCprzM0=; b=ZLa3S5EfZhU8j4yX8sFnDldn6v1m2yJFJk8fRsOaRABIIcMKD70d79YVrYmcwA1r9Y 4LeqB3EKgDl3dnBvvS2mDdie4hWFcg9zjYyAasxviY2JiVgf5ThM2bZjfktjyuoEiXju E0AGgxSnLiAbOpsvf5EXpGv+smoYMM+7uEfcd4zqTpXOzHHGP2dqq4TYQmzKCHrkhfov LRmCBSavBbjasKJx6fu0oZsJYFdu6u9LgkeVUeEeJ14R0Kf9TgTKFJTr1yomH8MnP+He rikRPhHTdKvCDjOnYdYYzPcyJE82fszQRbTGz2aqoiQwhambxL+Rr8FJGR4I8HhUtdaC Fquw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM533eQmHIh21SXmZDZUU8QOy8p9oUHTorHfbsdeYgjT3YNVQCMNXw AuPsyvevUqYuxJcGyHSK2wgM/UEIRhKpK0QxGatcGw== X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJyDevLIx5OvxGjseEoXqN8MsH+MyeRUMmlnRHpS2PD2yk/iMX7jVs2PGCX87BXYcbjy96O4EAKLwUYNP3nTuYY= X-Received: by 2002:a37:a085:: with SMTP id j127mr10552310qke.206.1617921108114; Thu, 08 Apr 2021 15:31:48 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: In-Reply-To: From: Warner Losh Date: Thu, 8 Apr 2021 16:31:37 -0600 Message-ID: To: Paul Ruizendaal Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="000000000000ec8f8205bf7d9cea" Subject: Re: [TUHS] PC Unix X-BeenThere: tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.26 Precedence: list List-Id: The Unix Heritage Society mailing list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: TUHS main list Errors-To: tuhs-bounces@minnie.tuhs.org Sender: "TUHS" --000000000000ec8f8205bf7d9cea Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 1:54 AM Paul Ruizendaal via TUHS < tuhs@minnie.tuhs.org> wrote: > It seems like Venix/86 came out in Spring 1983 and PC/IX in Spring 1984. I > guess by then RAM had become cheap enough that running in 64KB of core was > no longer a requirement and LSX and MX did not make sense anymore. Does > that sound right? > Venix/86 2.0 (still 7th edition) requires 192k to run, at least on my Rainbow, and get to login:. 128k and 64k simply are too small configurations to run it. There's not a lot of 'fat' in the Venix kernel and more-modern compilers only are able to make modest gains over the primitive pcc used at the time. The raw kernel for pc/ix is a few k larger than the venix kernel. So I'm guessing that's right. Warner --000000000000ec8f8205bf7d9cea Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


=
On Wed, Apr 7, 2021 at 1:54 AM Paul R= uizendaal via TUHS <tuhs@minnie.= tuhs.org> wrote:
It seems like Venix/86 came out in Spring 1983 and PC/IX in Spring 1984. I = guess by then RAM had become cheap enough that running in 64KB of core was = no longer a requirement and LSX and MX did not make sense anymore. Does tha= t sound right?

Venix/86 2.0 (still 7th = edition) requires 192k to run, at least on my Rainbow, and get to login:.= =C2=A0 128k and 64k simply are too small configurations to run it. There= 9;s not a lot of 'fat' in the Venix kernel and more-modern compiler= s only are able to make modest gains over the primitive pcc used at the tim= e. The raw kernel for pc/ix is a few k larger than the venix kernel. So I&#= 39;m guessing that's right.

Warner
=
--000000000000ec8f8205bf7d9cea--