Date: Fri, 25 Apr 1997 04:28:39 -0700 From: "Jordan K. Hubbard" <jkh@time.cdrom.com> To: Ernie Elu <ernie@eis.net.au> Cc: freebsd-isp@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Compiling cvsup, what a joke Message-ID: <6509.861967719@time.cdrom.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 25 Apr 1997 21:14:43 %2B1000." <199704251114.VAA12834@spooky.eis.net.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Your machines are either misconfigured or you simply do not know what
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
> They are all stock 2.2.-RELEASE machines with the bin and src distributions
> installed.
Which by no means implies that they are configured with the right
amount of swap space, memory and other resources to be *development*
machines (e.g. compile large things like modula3, a very definite
development activity). Since the "(A)uto" defaults do not configure
for a development machine, development machines *not* being the most
common configurations despite what some hackers might wish to believe,
if you're not specifically making sure that the box is appropriately
configured for these activities then yes, things will fall over just
as you'd expect them to on a misconfigured box.
The default configuration, for historical and statistical reasons, is
a mid-range desktop box. No huge compiles or enormous applications
expected, just what you'd expect to do with a modest (<16MB) amount of
memory and a space-conservative amount of swap. Your home test
machine probably has more memory and/or swap space configured than the
other boxes and so it just happened to work out of the box for you.
Jordan
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?6509.861967719>