🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <C0r8vp.683@news2.cis.umn.edu> davidli@simvax.labmed.umn.edu writes:
>Can someone who knows the history of UNIX please comment on whether the
>early versions of UNIX 'required' virtual memory in order to work?  My
>own impressions are that the PDP computers didn't have any virtual
>memory, and that most programs that were larger than memory consisted of
>a series of intelligent overlays.  (My impression is partially formed by
>experience with UNIX 7.0 on a PDP-11/34, requiring a grand total of
>10 megabytes of hard disk space, and the fact that one of the selling
>points of the VAX series of computers was the fact that they had virtual
>address space.)

Your impressions are accurate; it was even a big deal when the 11/34A
came out because it could split instruction and data space for a grand
total of 128K of per-process memory.  My DEC Pro-350 (11/34 class)
running VENIX 1.0 (V7-like UNIX clone) lets you use more than 64K per
process only by mapping pages of memory on a user-controlled basis
(The C library will do it for you if you use some compilation
switches) with a special OS call.

Why's this in comp.sys.atari.st?  Getting frustrated with trying to
compile 600 meg source files with GCC under MiNT? (1/2 :-) )

Cheers,
entropy
--
entropy@gnu.ai.mit.edu
entropy. . .it's not just a good idea, it's the second law.
Boycott AT&T, Lotus, Apple, and Xerox.  Join the League for
Programming Freedom!  Write to lpf@uunet.uu.net for more information.