Mike Nowlin wrote:
>
> Not to mention "how much memory do you really gain by unloading modules"?
> Considering the price of RAM these days (although not as low as
> it was, but I won't be spending $650 US for 16M any time soon
> again), the few K that unloading a bunch of modules saves won't
> EVER really be noticed by the 83Tb chunk that Nutscrape allocates.
>
> Excuse me, I must now think back to the dumbness achieved by people
> re-compiling Linux completely statically in hopes that it'll speed up
> their systems by not dynamically loading the libraries.... These
> were the same guys who wanted to unload modules to save kernel RAM...
The issue is with really small ram embedded systems.
Making things CAPABLE of being small is different from making
them dynamicly loadable.
>
> --mike
--
__--_|\ Julian Elischer
/ \ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
( OZ ) World tour 2000
---> X_.---._/ presently in: Perth
v
To Unsubscribe: send mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message
