Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 01 Nov 1996 03:27:48 -0600 | From | Keith Rohrer <> | Subject | Re: RFC: New kernel proc interface |
| |
Rob Riggs wrote: > The current proc code was the best solution when RAM was limited. > Today's systems have much more RAM than in the past. Hacks like > this should be elimnated now that the majority of systems have > the resources to do "the right thing." (TM) > > If this is really an issue, implimenting backwards compatibilty > for memory critical proc routines is trivial. Actually, I'd be much more interested in backwards compatibility by 'make config', but that would defeat the purpose of your efforts. Although, the 4-meg box I'm considering pulling down 1.2.latest for doesn't actually need /proc for much...
Minimally-configured Linux used to run just fine in 4 megs, and could handle an emacs without too much pain; nowadays a 4 meg linux box takes about as long to log in as a slowlaris box with YP and NFS automounted mail and home...assuming both aren't running X.
On my 24 meg machine, though, I don't mind that anywhere near as much as 6 megs of compressed kernel source (when I have or suspect a badly failed patch) or 12 megs of device driver source... The wonder of linux is that it supports almost everything, but that doesn't mean everyone needs all those drivers, or needs to gcc them into essentially-empty .o files...
Keith (wanting to see if 1.0.9 can run ip_masq...)
-- "It moved faster. I swear, they are evolving right before my eyes. If you see something this big, with eight legs coming your way, let me know; I have to kill it before it develops language skills." --- Ambassador Londo Mollari, in 'Sic Transit Vir' (Babylon 5)
|  |