Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2013 10:44:38 +0700 From: Olivier Nicole <olivier.nicole@cs.ait.ac.th> To: Bill Tillman <btillman99@yahoo.com> Cc: "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: Re: X client without X server Message-ID: <CA%2Bg%2BBvi%2Bcs=TFFkp5Vxxu-PmuNqqv0exZQ-MpbOZttF4UyOT4A@mail.gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <1372865169.34030.YahooMailNeo@web165004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com> References: <CA%2Bg%2BBvggCPtF-AMSc_PanaPtBAD2K_TRDgQzdtTrbd-M43QLKw@mail.gmail.com> <201307031317.r63DHQqR034336@mech-cluster241.men.bris.ac.uk> <1372865169.34030.YahooMailNeo@web165004.mail.bf1.yahoo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi, > Just my 2=A2 worth on this. Sure, one always wants to keep overhead low. = But > the days of limited RAM, small hard drives, etc...are long since behind u= s. My concern is when portupgrade -a. The more ports on the system, the more likely the upgrade will fail. So I'd prefer to have as little unused ports as possible. Not to mention that security wise, having unused ports sitting there is not too good. Best regards, Olivier
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?CA%2Bg%2BBvi%2Bcs=TFFkp5Vxxu-PmuNqqv0exZQ-MpbOZttF4UyOT4A>