Date: Mon, 15 Mar 1999 01:54:46 +0900 From: "Daniel C. Sobral" <dcs@newsguy.com> To: Sheldon Hearn <sheldonh@iafrica.com> Cc: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Proposal: Define MAXMEM in GENERIC Message-ID: <36EBE9D6.7E6320FE@newsguy.com> References: <35437.921428498@axl.noc.iafrica.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
I'm against this. Magazines test OS as they come out of the box. I'm no "all in the name of marketing and market share" zealot, but this would mean that *EVERY* benchmark we get in would be stacked against us. Sheldon Hearn wrote: > > Hi folks, > > The originator of PR i386/9755 (which related to a 3.0-RELEASE install > failure) has made a valid point. > > We know that some people with >64MB RAM are going to have trouble with > the speculative memory probe while installing FreeBSD with the GENERIC > (here read any release) kernel. So why don't we add to GENERIC the > following line? > > options "MAXMEM=(64*1024)" > > The major argument that comes to mind immediately is that people are > going to end up running sub-optimal servers out-of-the-box. However, the > change is supported by the following mindset: > > Gain: > Make things easier for people with broken hardware. > > Cost: > Annoy the people who have large memory configurations and who > don't build custom kernels. > > I'm of the opinion that we're talking about a number of annoyed people > so small that the gain is justified. > > Ciao, > Sheldon. > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message -- Daniel C. Sobral (8-DCS) dcs@newsguy.com dcs@freebsd.org "What happened?" "It moved, sir!" To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?36EBE9D6.7E6320FE>