This belongs on -questions, not -hackers at this point.
Please wrap your lines before 80 columns.
On Mon, 2006-Jun-26 19:16:35 -0400, Bob Richards wrote: On Boot, the
>boot-loader complained bitterly "Can't find a Kernel to boot", and
>dropped me to an "OK" prompt. Damn says I! Murpheys law in eff
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Wow!
First I want to thank all of you who responded for the great information!
As I read it all, I became more and more excited about my decision to switch to
FreeBsd!
And became more and more impatient with US Postal Mail!
So! I went and downloade
On Mon, Jun 26, 2006 at 10:10:28AM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dmitry Morozovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> > On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Mike Meyer wrote:
> > MM> The other constraint on swap is that if you want the system to save a
> > MM> core dump if it panics, you need a dev
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Dmitry Morozovsky <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Mike Meyer wrote:
> MM> The other constraint on swap is that if you want the system to save a
> MM> core dump if it panics, you need a device to dump on that's 64Kb
> MM> bigger than ram. That's one device,
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Mike Meyer wrote:
MM> The other constraint on swap is that if you want the system to save a
MM> core dump if it panics, you need a device to dump on that's 64Kb
MM> bigger than ram. That's one device, not all of swap.
This is not quite true, as there always are some unused me
On Sat, 24 Jun 2006, Mike Meyer wrote:
Swap drive, should probably be a piece of one of the 17GB drives (NO RAID)
the Box has 500MB ram..
Why not RAID your swap? The extra reliability might not be worth very much,
but the extra performance couldn't hurt - unless you don't plan on swappin
In message: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Avleen Vig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
: On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 03:32:26PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
: > Why not RAID your swap? The extra reliability might not be worth very
: > much, but the extra performance couldn't hurt - unless you don't plan
: > on
On Sat, Jun 24, 2006 at 03:32:26PM -0400, Mike Meyer wrote:
> Why not RAID your swap? The extra reliability might not be worth very
> much, but the extra performance couldn't hurt - unless you don't plan
> on swapping at all. This is enough of a win that the swap subsystem
> will interleave swap us
In <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Bob Richards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> typed:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Hi Folks:
>
> This is my first post here. I believe it is the correct list for my
> questions. If not,
> please excuse me and direct me to the proper list.
>
> I have been using
Bob Richards wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Folks:
This is my first post here. I believe it is the correct list for my questions.
If not,
please excuse me and direct me to the proper list.
I have been using Linux as my WorkStation since V0.98 Kernel, so I know a bit
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi Folks:
This is my first post here. I believe it is the correct list for my questions.
If not,
please excuse me and direct me to the proper list.
I have been using Linux as my WorkStation since V0.98 Kernel, so I know a bit
about NIX's
I am givin
11 matches
Mail list logo
