Date: Thu, 4 Apr 1996 02:22:39 -0800 From: asami@cs.berkeley.edu (Satoshi Asami) To: jkh@time.cdrom.com Cc: ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: NO_PACKAGE and NO_CDROM Message-ID: <199604041022.CAA05276@sunrise.cs.berkeley.edu> In-Reply-To: <6104.828612908@time.cdrom.com> (jkh@time.cdrom.com)
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
* > Errr. I'm sorry I totally forgot about it, I hate all those little * > port collections! I wish we can merge them all together! :( * * Considering how small the ports collection is, I have nothing against * that idea at all. Any no votes? Last time I mentioned it, someone said it's the number of files that affects the size of supscan, not the amount (in megabytes), and that was the reason of the ports collection being split up. I think it was Rod that mentioned it. I'm not exactly sure about the memory situation of freefall and what the coeffecient (assuming it's a linear function) but I think the trouble is a bit too much, having to update supfiles all over the place every time we add something. How's the memory for freefall doing these days? Memory prices are dropping very quickly these days, you can get 32MB of non-parity memory for <$500 now! :) Satoshi
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199604041022.CAA05276>