Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: John Larkin <jjlarkin@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Wed, 02 May 2007 17:42:33 -0700
On 2 May 2007 15:11:11 -0700, MooseFET <kensmith@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On May 2, 8:18 am, John Larkin
<jjlar...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, 02 May 2007 09:31:56 +0100, Paul Burke <p...@xxxxxxxxxx>
wrote:
jasen wrote:
linux in less than 256 kilobytes ???
====
was that ever possible?
Sorry, meg of course. Still harking back to the days of OS9 with 64kb
RAM....
My embedded products use a cpu with 2K bytes of on-chip ram. I've
rarely needed more, even on products with user interfaces and eternet.
2K bytes, Luxury! I did a multitasking[1] OS in 256 bytes.
[1] 3 is multiple, isn't it.
That ain't a lot of room to save even three contexts on three stacks.
Which CPU?
John
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: MooseFET
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- References:
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: Andrew Holme
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: Paul Burke
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: jasen
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: Paul Burke
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: John Larkin
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- From: MooseFET
- Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- Prev by Date: Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- Next by Date: Re: het Prongboi !
- Previous by thread: Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- Next by thread: Re: you can't bash Microsoft enough
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|
