Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!floyd!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!sri-unix!HFISCHER@USC-ECLB.ARPA From: HFISCHER@USC-ECLB.ARPA Newsgroups: net.unix Subject: Re: PC Unix, hacking the 64K limitation Message-ID: <16468@sri-arpa.UUCP> Date: Mon, 13-Feb-84 02:28:00 EST Article-I.D.: sri-arpa.16468 Posted: Mon Feb 13 02:28:00 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 10-Feb-84 03:01:15 EST Lines: 31 In response to your message sent Mon, 6 Feb 84 23:05:10 EST Mike, My desire was to get Ada compilers running under PC's Unix. I know of three efforts which are relevant: Irvine Computer Science, who claims to need over 64K of user-I space but not D space, University of York, (no knowledge about their needs), and Alsys West (Ichbiah's Boston startup) who claims to need over 64K of user-D space but not I space. (AJPO says both York and Alsys have formally indicated intent to validate this year; Irvine says me too.) I would accept some form of hack which killed swapping and multiprocessing for a while (e.g., during compiling) in turn for finding and siezing lots of (either) user I or user D space. As we used to do on the good ol' 360's, you can reload bases (ES) to your heart's content if you know that your memory is not being swapped or physically moved about. I agree that another processor would've been better. Unfortunately, corporate america has bought IBM's marketing pitch, and the likes of my and similar companies have so many PC's in house and on order that to ask for something else is to not be serious. We need standardization and transportability, and the PC and Unix to some vague degree give us that. So, back to my question, are there folks who have tried this sort of hack, knowing full well that technology is capable of giving us "better" solutions, but nontheless, ... Herm Fischer -------