Newsgroups: comp.os.mach
Path: utzoo!utgpu!watserv1!watdragon!rose!ccplumb
From: ccplumb@rose.uwaterloo.ca (Colin Plumb)
Subject: Re: Bytes in Mach 3.0?
Message-ID: <1991Feb18.033855.4864@watdragon.waterloo.edu>
Sender: daemon@watdragon.waterloo.edu (Owner of Many System Processes)
Organization: University of Waterloo
References: <2981@fai.UUCP> <CHAMPLIN.91Feb12131759@virgil.pa.dec.com> <1991Feb13.170901@ibmpa.awdpa.ibm.com> <1991Feb14.220240.26795@ico.isc.com> <62753@bbn.BBN.COM> <1991Feb15.214231.21348@watmath.waterloo.edu>
Date: Mon, 18 Feb 1991 03:38:55 GMT
Lines: 37

>> In article <1991Feb14.220240.26795@ico.isc.com> rcd@ico.isc.com (Dick Dunn) writes:
>>> My confusion stems from the understanding that the Mach 3.0 kernel
>>> is supposed to be the "micro-kernel" version, and the belief that a 240 Kb
>>> kernel cannot reasonably be labeled "micro".

I must agree.  For all the VM functionality in Mach, I'll allow it 128 K
but wish for less.  Something is seriously wrong with 240K.

gamiddle@watmath.waterloo.edu (Guy Middleton) wrote:
>I don't think it is all that small.  4.3bsd on a VAX has text of similar size:
>
>text	data	bss	dec	hex
>229784	166320	90048	486152	76b08
>
>Note that it is probably more fair to compare 386 with VAX binaries than with
>SPARC, MIPS or HP-PA, since RISC code tends to occupy more space.

Another VAX, same site, different configuration::
text	data	bss	dec	hex
220608	82548	66860	370016	5a560

4.3BSD on an HP 9000/236 (68010):
text	data	bss	dec	hex
246752	27392	54152	328296	50268

The larger test size is probably due to debugging code; the system is
a bit flaky...

We need the old utzoo, which was constrained to 64K split I&D.

For comparison, a system V release 4 /unix on a 68030:
text	data	bss	dec	hex
702704	117252	313936	1133892	114d44

Ouch!
-- 
	-Colin
