> > From: Evan Jeffrey <ejeffrey@utrek.ml.org>
> ...
> > I think it would be better to create a "new" swapfile type for > 128 (or
> > 512) MB swap areas, where the swap area signature (SWAP-SPACE ?) would be
> > replaced by something like "NEW-SWAPXX" where XX is a short int indicating
> > the number of bitmap blocks at the beginning of this swap area. This give
> > us an ~8 TB theoretical limit, which is pretty big.
>
> Theorethically nice, but I am such a person who has a habit
> of jumping back and forth between radically different kernel
> versions (2.0.x and 2.1.x!), and therefore I do prefer methods
> that don't require me do radical operations at system boot;
> like "mkswap" at each boot on which even the "mkswap" should
> recognize what the system understands at the moment...
BIG swap vs normal swap?
have normal swap operate normally?
You'll never notice - unless you decide to create a >128M swapfile (i386)
and then you'll discover 2.0.x can't handle such swap sizes.....
[and it will (hopefully?) be ignored...]
G'day, eh? :)
- Teunis