Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2000 18:57:25 -0500 From: Martin <marrandy@tampabay.rr.com> To: Andrew Hannam <famzon@bigfoot.com>, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com> Cc: small@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: One disk vs Two Disk (was Re: New approach to picobsd) Message-ID: <yam8058.1285.270016200@192.168.0.1> In-Reply-To: <005d01bf66be$68384200$0104010a@famzon.com.au>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hello Andrew On 24-Jan-00, you wrote: > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Greg Lehey" <grog@lemis.com> > Subject: Re: One disk vs Two Disk (was Re: New approach to picobsd) > > >> I don't believe that the named problems relate to the code. What >> you're thinking of is the size that the process image can assume, and >> that depends on how much work it does. > > Correct - still the issue remains - named is a memory hog. > >>> (PS. Does anyone have a tiny version of named or dialog ?) http://cr.yp.to/dnscache.html Regards...Martin -- All censorships exist to prevent any one from challenging current conceptions and existing institutions. All progress is initiated by challenging current conceptions, and executed by supplanting existing institutions. Consequently the first condition of progress is the removal of censorships. -- George Bernard Shaw To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-small" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?yam8058.1285.270016200>