I have a 486 running as a firewall. I honestly didn't even think about trying 5.0 on that thing, forget a 386. So you don't get upset when Windows XP requires a Pentium two million with a bejigabyte of RAM but you complain when 5.0 Won't run on a 386?
Adam > In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > : >I don't feel this is a good decision. (I still have a 486, > act as a : >small server and a 286 witch is in storage) This > basally means that : >any one who doesn't have the latest > processor can't install FreeBSD. : > : No it doesn't mean that. > : > : FreeBSD still runs on all 386 family CPUs, the only > difference is that : if you want to run it on a 80386 you need > to enable an option in : your kernel config file. > : > : It will out of the box run on 486 and anything later. > > One problem with most 386 boxes is that they have very little > memory. sysinstall is a big, bloated pig dog these days that > takes more RAM than most 386 boxes have. This is true also > for many 486 boxes too. So even if 386 stuff were in the > default kernel, you'd likely have other issues in making > sysinstall work and have to do custom > hacking... > > Warner > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message -- Adam Migus Network Associates Laboratories (http://www.nailabs.com) TrustedBSD (http://www.trustedbsd.org) | The Power To Secure To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
