From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Date: Fri, 25 May 2001 10:10:18 +0200 From: David Weinehall Subject: Re: [RFC][PATCH] Re: Linux 2.4.4-ac10 Message-ID: <20010525101018.A473@khan.acc.umu.se> References: <20010520235409.G2647@bug.ucw.cz> <20010521223212.C4934@khan.acc.umu.se> <3B0BF8B6.D7940FA3@mvista.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <3B0BF8B6.D7940FA3@mvista.com>; from scott_anderson@mvista.com on Wed, May 23, 2001 at 05:51:50PM +0000 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Return-Path: To: Scott Anderson Cc: Pavel Machek , Rik van Riel , Mike Galbraith , "Stephen C. Tweedie" , Ingo Oeser , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-mm@kvack.org List-ID: On Wed, May 23, 2001 at 05:51:50PM +0000, Scott Anderson wrote: > David Weinehall wrote: > > IMVHO every developer involved in memory-management (and indeed, any > > software development; the authors of ntpd comes in mind here) should > > have a 386 with 4MB of RAM and some 16MB of swap. Nowadays I have the > > luxury of a 486 with 8MB of RAM and 32MB of swap as a firewall, but it's > > still a pain to work with. > > If you really want to have fun, remove all swap... Oh, I've done some testing without swap too, mainly to test Rik's oom-killer. Seemed to work pretty well. Can't say it was enjoyable, though. /David _ _ // David Weinehall /> Northern lights wander \\ // Project MCA Linux hacker // Dance across the winter sky // \> http://www.acc.umu.se/~tao/