Date: Fri, 11 Jan 2002 03:09:55 -0800 From: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> To: Lucas Nussbaum <lucas@sicfa.org> Cc: questions@freebsd.org, kris@obsecurity.org Subject: Re: differences between 2-STABLE, 3-STABLE and 4-STABLE Message-ID: <20020111030954.A19114@xor.obsecurity.org> In-Reply-To: <20020111110159.GA11801@oxygene.in.schickler.net>; from lucas@sicfa.org on Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:01:59PM %2B0100 References: <20020111102201.GA5668@oxygene.in.schickler.net> <20020111023152.A18542@xor.obsecurity.org> <20020111110159.GA11801@oxygene.in.schickler.net>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
--VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Jan 11, 2002 at 12:01:59PM +0100, Lucas Nussbaum wrote: > > Unfortunately for you, I expect that you'll have problems fitting more > > modern versions in only 4MB (it likes to have at least 8MB). >=20 > I thought the only problem was to be able to make the kernel fit in only > 4 MB ram. For the rest, I think swapping will do it. > Wouldn't a customised kernel do the trick, with 3-STABLE, maybe ? > I remember installing 3-STABLE on a 8 MB system, with a GENERIC kernel. Well, it might fit, but it would probably swap like a bastard. I suppose it's worth a try! > I suppose it's a compiler's version problem, since 2.1.5 used gcc 2.6.3. No, it's more than that; there are probably ~30 different things which have changed incompatibly since then. The biggest of these is the binary format has changed from a.out to ELF, and the transitional change-over code in the system makefiles is no longer there. > Would a source upgrade like that work : > 2.1.5 -> 2-STABLE > 2-STABLE -> 3-STABLE <- possible stop here, since it would be a great > improvement ;) > 3-STABLE -> 4-STABLE > with maybe intermediate steps at 3.0 and 4.0 if direct upgrades from > n-stable to (n+1)-stable doesn't work ? You'd probably need to do this in about 6 or 8 separate upgrades and make worlds..it's really not worth doing it this way, especially on such a small and slow and machine. It would take literally months of compilation time. Kris --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (FreeBSD) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE8PsgBWry0BWjoQKURArhLAJ4p/vBQiZsKWs57qhkNhinJwImgLQCbBYgC rQ6/4QZRWK7pKSCzdgUwec0= =dKZj -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --VS++wcV0S1rZb1Fb-- To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-questions" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20020111030954.A19114>