On 2004-11-11 16:36, LEI CHEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 16:11, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>>On 2004-11-11 04:36, LEI CHEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 03:44, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
If you're using the -pipe option of gcc, it shouldn't make such a
On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 16:11, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> On 2004-11-11 04:36, LEI CHEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 03:44, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
> >> If you're using the -pipe option of gcc, it shouldn't make such a
> >> great difference where /tmp is. I suspect it will ma
On 2004-11-11 02:17, LEI CHEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>On Thu, 2004-11-11 at 01:37, Giorgos Keramidas wrote:
>>On 2004-11-11 01:28, LEI CHEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>> I have just upgraded to 5-stable branch, and I noticed that the
>>> tmpmfs="YES" and tmpsize="20m" options can be put into /
I've just added those two options into /etc/rc.conf and commented out
the line in /etc/fstab.
It works! :)
df -h output is :
Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on
...
...
/dev/md031M 16k 28M0%/tmp
I am just wondering what would be the mfs size that suitable for
On 2004-11-11 01:28, LEI CHEN <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I have just upgraded to 5-stable branch, and I noticed that the
> tmpmfs="YES" and tmpsize="20m" options can be put into /etc/rc.conf
> directly to create a memory file system automatically.
Yesterday, I have committed a couple of enhanc
