Date: Wed, 29 Jan 2020 14:02:34 -0700 From: "Brad Davis" <brd@FreeBSD.org> To: "Mark Millard via freebsd-arch" <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: svn commit: r356758 - in head/usr.sbin/bsdinstall: . scripts Message-ID: <8c122948-010f-4634-94c0-43198da5e586@www.fastmail.com> In-Reply-To: <2C0CC3EC-343D-4068-9E05-856A66FF175C@yahoo.com> References: <2C0CC3EC-343D-4068-9E05-856A66FF175C.ref@yahoo.com> <2C0CC3EC-343D-4068-9E05-856A66FF175C@yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Wed, Jan 15, 2020, at 10:19 PM, Mark Millard via freebsd-arch wrote: > Ed Maste emaste at freebsd.org wrote on > Thu Jan 16 02:14:58 UTC 2020 : > > > On Wed, 15 Jan 2020 at 17:55, Warner Losh <imp at bsdimp.com> wrote: > > > > > > It's not i386 vs amd64 that's the issue. It's the total amount of RAM. ZFS > > > is perfectly happy with i386 installs with enough RAM. We'd catch most > > > sub-optimal cases if we'd offer it only for systems with > ~2-4GB. > > > > Very good point, defaulting to UFS for <4GB and ZFS for >=4GB sounds > > decent to me. > > I'd pick to avoid Rock64, RPi4, etc. in 4 GiByte Keep in mind, none of those use the installer so this is moot. Regards, Brad Davis
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?8c122948-010f-4634-94c0-43198da5e586>