> So the question is... is plan9 still lean and mean enough to fit onto a
> machine with a 64K address space?
Lean in concepts and algorithms doesn't necessarily imply lean in
resource usage -- sometimes the opposite. I don't have access to
1st edition source, but the 2nd edition C compiler used a simplified
malloc() which grew the address space in 500000 byte hunks, and a
free() which was even simpler:
void
free(void *p)
{
USED(p);
}
It seems that already in 1995, virtual memory was assumed to be
not particularly constrained.
