Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Sun, 23 Nov 1997 17:52:48 -0800 (PST)
From:      Shawn Ramsey <shawn@luke.cpl.net>
To:        Alex <garbanzo@hooked.net>
Cc:        "Jonathan M. Bresler" <jmb@freebsd.org>, Wei Weng <wweng@stevens-tech.edu>, freebsd-questions@freebsd.org
Subject:   Re: performance differences
Message-ID:  <Pine.BSF.3.95.971123175137.7393A-100000@luke.cpl.net>
In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971123160831.17923A-100000@zippy.dyn.ml.org>

next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > 	installed.  The amount used is reported in the startup messages,
> > 	which the reviewers must have missed.
> > 
> > 	they did not do the minimum of building a kernel to use
> > 	the larger amount of memory available
> 
> The whole point of this was to test a machine "out of the box". I.E. doing
> as little customization as possible.  If they had tested with 3.0 (a.k.a.
> -current) which sizes >64M OTH, methinks that FreeBSD would have come out
> on top.

If I remember correctly, this upset someone on the FreeBSD core team(David
Greenman?), and this bug was fixed. :) Better late than never...






Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.3.95.971123175137.7393A-100000>