Messages in this thread | | | From | (Linus Torvalds) | Subject | Re: Memory Rusting Effect [re: Linux hostile to poverty] | Date | 18 Jul 1998 19:59:59 GMT |
| |
In article <XFMail.980718123733.dbr@oto.dyn.ml.org>, David B. Rees <dbr@oto.dyn.ml.org> wrote: > >This brings up another question... People have noted that 2.1.109 is much >better on 8MB machines, but what about 4MB machines? Has anyone tried it? >Maybe I'll give it a shot today and post my results...
I'm actually officially going to suggest that if you have less than 16MB RAM on your system, you're probably better off running 2.0.x than 2.2.
Linux 1.0 used to run in 2MB (not well, but it ran), 1.2 already pretty much required 4MB, 2.2 will pretty much require 8MB and 16MB preferred.
Don't get me wrong - I'll make sure it works on an 8MB machine, but I won't consider it a showstopper if it is noticeably slower than 2.0.x on such a machine.
Linus
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.altern.org/andrebalsa/doc/lkml-faq.html
| |