Date: Sun, 1 Oct 1995 17:28:37 -0700 (PDT) From: Julian Elischer <julian@ref.tfs.com> To: dennis@etinc.com (dennis) Cc: taob@io.org, hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD 2.1 will require a minimum of 8MB for installation. Message-ID: <199510020028.RAA03243@ref.tfs.com> In-Reply-To: <199510012343.TAA08602@etinc.com> from "dennis" at Oct 1, 95 07:43:04 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
remember that what we are suggesting is not that we drop support for this or that, but that we supply a couple of different install versions.. people with 4MB would have to do without SOMETHING... machines with more can use the default install.. > > >On Sat, 30 Sep 1995, dennis wrote: > >> > >> NO!!!!!!!! NFS is the best and fastest way to load semi-custom systems. > > > > I agree, but if we have to choose, I'd lose NFS first too. How > >many first-time users (those who will be baffled the most by the 8-meg > >requirement) have access to an NFS server with the FreeBSD distribution > >ready of installation? > >-- > > > Great Idea! Lets lose the established users who are pushing for the O/S to > support the idiots. Let's eliminate those that are building systems based on > FreeBSD in hopes of luring the occasional one-time user. This is a great > business decision. > > Dennis > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- > Emerging Technologies, Inc. http://www.etinc.com > > Synchronous Communications Cards and Routers For > Discriminating Tastes. 56k to T1 and beyond. Frame > Relay, PPP, HDLC, and X.25 > >
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199510020028.RAA03243>