On 20 April 2009 c. 13:55:05 Henning Brauer wrote:

quoted text
> and in any case this is less about ramdisk size but more about

> raidframe which we're going to get rid off eventually (when marco ever

> gets softraid upt o a usable level, read rebuild working)

Hell, yes! But "eventually" is not "till the end of month", so I have to

use something that doesn't crash when doing newfs(8) during installation

now (I'll file a bug in a few days after collecting more info on it). :(
> * Stuart Henderson  [2009-04-20 11:38]:

quoted text
> > off the top of my head (remembered from bumping into limits with

> > flashboot), I think there are some restrictions imposed by ISA, and

> > of course some small machines have limited RAM which this eats into.

Hmm... I'll investigate this, thank you very much for information.
> > On 2009/04/20 11:59, Vadim Zhukov wrote:

quoted text
> > > On 20 April 2009 ?. 11:38:19 Stuart Henderson wrote:

> > > > there certainly are size restrictions on RAMDISK_CD.

> > >

> > > Sorry for stupid questions, but what those restrictions are and

> > > what is the reason for them? It's not the disk space, obviously.

> > > And if RAMDISK_CD kernel could not load into memory then this

> > > machine will not be much usable using GENERIC one either;

> > > administrator of this system will compile it's own kernels anyway

> > > to free some more space in RAM...

> > >

> > > May be I'm too far from reality in my house; yesterday it was

> > > still snow falling in my window... :) Then I send my apologies to

> > > anyone who's machine will not be usable after adding RAIDFrame

> > > into stock kernel.

> > >

> > > > On 2009-04-19, Vadim Zhukov  wrote:

> > > > > Hello all.

> > > > >

> > > > > Is there any particular reason to not have RAIDFrame built-in

> > > > > in RAMDISK_CD kernels? I mean, are there any restrictions,

> > > > > except kernel/ramdisk size, which are not the case with

> > > > > RAMDISK_CD, obviously?

> > > > >

> > > > > Maybe I missed something digging through Google output

> > > > > containing a lot of links to official FAQ and quotes from it.

> > > > > :(

--

  Best wishes,

    Vadim Zhukov
A: Because it messes up the way people read text.

Q: Why is a top-posting such a bad thing?