*BSD News Article 31895


Return to BSD News archive

Xref: sserve comp.os.386bsd.misc:2599 comp.os.linux.misc:17465
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc,comp.os.linux.misc
Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!msuinfo!agate!usenet.ins.cwru.edu!wariat.org!kf8nh!bsa
From: bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org (Brandon S. Allbery)
Subject: Re: Linux vs *BSD (new twist)
Distribution: "world"
Message-ID: <1994Jun15.001412.16819@kf8nh.wariat.org>
Organization: Brandon's Linux box and AmPR node, Mentor, OH
Date: Wed, 15 Jun 1994 00:14:12 GMT
References: <2sl6o3$pvs@aurora.engr.latech.edu> <hart.770900967@apanix.apana.org.au> <2t0rno$c8p@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM> <sysseh.771585971@pandora>
Lines: 20

In article <sysseh.771585971@pandora>, sysseh@devetir.qld.gov.au (Steve Hocking) says:
+---------------
| peter@Starbase.NeoSoft.COM (Peter da Silva) writes:
| >I'm running System V on a 386/16 in 4MB and a 70 MB hard disk and getting a
| >News feed.
| 
| 	Sigh. I used to run an accounting system in 1.6Mb of memory on a
| 6MHz 286 running Xenix - 10 terminals. The code was written in C, ported
+------------->8

24 terminals under SVR2 in 4MB.  Database application (UNIFY 3.2), plus some
accounting and an inventory/MRP system in COBOL.  I was absolutely horrified
when SVR3.2 needed 2MB just to boot; you can imagine how I felt about the 4MB
minimum for SVR3.2.  And let's not even *talk* about the early (incorrect)
claims that SVR4.0 required 16MB...  :-)

++Brandon
-- 
Brandon S. Allbery	   kf8nh@kf8nh.ampr.org		 bsa@kf8nh.wariat.org
Friends don't let friends load Windows NT.