[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Old Index]
Re: mutexes, locks and so on...
> > Oh well! I guess I should go away now.
> And me, and everyone else running anything but x86_64 (and, maybe,
> i386; I don't know whether that's sufficiently modern to count).
Yes, please go.
> Compilers that page themselves to death unless given over twice the RAM
> a uV2 maxes out at. Decisions driven by "a megabyte of disk costs
> what, $0.00008?". Now this.
It's requirements of application.
Nowadays applications assume machines have enough RAM for their purpose.
It just means "old machines won't be suitable for modern applications"
and users should choose machines per their requirements. That's all.
> bqt, wanna start a fork? Looks as though NetBSD no longer supports
> most of the architectures it used to.
NetBSD/sun2 5.1 still works on multiuser (though gcc won't work on it).
It shows scalability of NetBSD, and it's enough for me.
Main Index |
Thread Index |