>Most likely. I have a gateway running 4.7 on a P75/16MB machine with
>no problems. Try it, you'll like it.
I'm using it on a P75 with 16meg ram. Seems to run just fine for me.Quote:> Like the subject says, I saw on www.freebsd.org that it would
> supposely run on a 386. I just want to use it as a router for a small
> home network. I will be using cable as my connectiong. Any help
> would be appreciated.
Remove nospam, invalid, and 0123456789 to reply.
Even a 486 would make a very nice little runner.
I disagree about the X Server comment because its not really the X Server
itself that wouldnt run, but rather it'd be the display manager. Don't even
think KDE, its a real bloater!!! If you get a simple one, I am sure it'd run
ok (although maybe 16MB RAM is pushing it a little, I am sure it would
Thanks, Alex J Burke.
In the FreeBSD 2.x days I used to have a machine with 8Meg that would
run X. I used twm and fvwm for window managers. rxvt is smaller than
xterm for a terminal program. I was an emacs user - it was painfull.
Today, for a small ram machine I would still plan on rxvt for the
terminal. But for a window manager I would try matchbox. And for emacs
- learn vi.
>Even a 486 would make a very nice little runner.
>I disagree about the X Server comment because its not really the X Server
>itself that wouldnt run, but rather it'd be the display manager. Don't even
>think KDE, its a real bloater!!! If you get a simple one, I am sure it'd run
>ok (although maybe 16MB RAM is pushing it a little, I am sure it would
>Thanks, Alex J Burke.
david parsons \bi/ This box used to be a Linux machine before the fan
\/ died and melted the hard disk.
It consumes more then 16 megs, but disabling ipsec, stopping a few
things would make it fit :
13 processes: 1 running, 12 sleeping
CPU states: 0.4% user, 0.0% nice, 0.0% system, 0.0% interrupt, 99.6% idle
Mem: 8796K Active, 14M Inact, 22M Wired, 3764K Cache, 14M Buf, 11M Free
Swap: 150M Total, 3244K Used, 147M Free, 2% Inuse
PID USERNAME PRI NICE SIZE RES STATE TIME WCPU CPU COMMAND
87264 peter 28 0 1892K 1028K RUN 0:00 1.45% 0.73% top
118 root 2 0 6456K 3840K select 389:34 0.00% 0.00% isakmpd
87 root 2 0 1312K 584K select 59:45 0.00% 0.00% ntpd
56 root 10 0 928K 156K nanslp 33:52 0.00% 0.00% ipmon
84 root 2 0 948K 444K select 8:17 0.00% 0.00% syslogd
96 root 10 0 996K 504K nanslp 5:52 0.00% 0.00% cron
388 root 2 0 2320K 896K select 3:11 0.00% 0.00% sshd
87254 root 2 0 2464K 1588K select 0:02 0.00% 0.00% sshd
87255 peter 18 0 1316K 932K pause 0:00 0.00% 0.00% tcsh
128 root 3 0 948K 316K ttyin 0:00 0.00% 0.00% getty
127 root 3 0 948K 316K ttyin 0:00 0.00% 0.00% getty
129 root 3 0 948K 316K ttyin 0:00 0.00% 0.00% getty
94 root 2 0 1052K 292K select 0:00 0.00% 0.00% inetd
A custom kernel optimized for smaller footprint would help too.
IPSec Sverige ( At Gothenburg Riverside )
Sorry about my e-mail address, but i'm trying to keep spam out,
remove "icke-reklam" if you feel for mailing me. Thanx.
A friend of mine asked me what to buy for running Linux.
The choice is a pentium box with 16 Meg ram, or a 486 box with 32 Meg ram.
Assuming there will be no future upgrade, which one do you choose?
He mentioned that both are on 66 MHz clock.
Please give us an advice.