> > Linux-2 + Xserver + fvwm (95) + severall xterm + bash + xemacs + gcc +
> > some application processes = more than 16 Mb.
>
> Well let me suggest something
>
> Linux-2.0 + Xserver -su -bs + original fvwm + rxvts + ash + joe in rxvt + lcc
>
> Now tell me the problem is the kernel
I (we) have no problems with linux kernel. But we have problems with some
other systems (WNT, Bletch95, SCO, etc..).
I use original fvwm and some traditional editor each time I donnot need
something more sophisticated = most of the time (a console is often enough).
However, I seems to me that most linux users like sophisticated tools (??).
> > A serious ftp server or web server probably use more than 64 MB.
>
> Web servers need little RAM. Current FTP servers need a lot because wu.ftpd
> is a pile of crud when it comes to the word 'efficient'. I dunno if other
> ftpds are better and useful. Troll ftpd is efficient but not quite right
> somewhere.
Thanks for this information.
> > Now imagine a system with 128 MB of RAM and some controller(s) that use(s)
> > ISA/DMA and:
>
> If you can afford 128Mb of RAM you can afford PCI bus DMA
Obvious, but sometimes not applied.
> > Managing such situation may complexify the kernel too much.
>
> Indeed
>
> > In this case, garbaging 1 MB of memory at startup for ISA/DMA need is
> > probably a good solution.
>
> Why waste memory ?
Just to show that "silly+simple" can be cleverer than "complex".
Obviously we can do something better than just losing 1MB.
"Simple and clever" is indeed better.
Regards, Gerard.