From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Mon Apr 2 02:15:06 2012 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [69.147.83.52]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B38C106566C for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 02:15:05 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from wonkity.com (wonkity.com [67.158.26.137]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3F0A8FC0C for ; Mon, 2 Apr 2012 02:15:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from wonkity.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by wonkity.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id q322F4qR071674; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 20:15:04 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Received: from localhost (wblock@localhost) by wonkity.com (8.14.5/8.14.5/Submit) with ESMTP id q322F478071671; Sun, 1 Apr 2012 20:15:04 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from wblock@wonkity.com) Date: Sun, 1 Apr 2012 20:15:04 -0600 (MDT) From: Warren Block To: deeptech71@gmail.com In-Reply-To: <4F78DB76.9070705@gmail.com> Message-ID: References: <4F746F1E.6090702@mail.zedat.fu-berlin.de> <4F74BCE8.2030802@vangyzen.net> <20120330.151848.41706133.sthaug@nethelp.no> <4F765682.5040707@gmail.com> <4F78DB76.9070705@gmail.com> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (BSF 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; format=flowed; charset=US-ASCII X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.7 (wonkity.com [127.0.0.1]); Sun, 01 Apr 2012 20:15:04 -0600 (MDT) Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Using TMPFS for /tmp and /var/run? X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2012 02:15:06 -0000 On Mon, 2 Apr 2012, deeptech71@gmail.com wrote: > I personally wouldn't use TMPFS, because I have a rather low amount of RAM > (512MiB). Depends on what you keep there. I've been trying it lately. For an X desktop running xfce, /tmp is only 332K.