On Saturday 10 November 2007, Josselin Mouette wrote: > Le samedi 10 novembre 2007 à 06:13 +0000, Christian Perrier a écrit : > > So, actually, I don't think there would be any strong opposition of > > the remaining D-I team members for such change...as long as someone > > takes the task of working on it (without breaking D-I, you would have > > guessed). > > Well, I can't check whether this will actually break D-I because I don't > have a test environment, but AIUI the attached patch should do the > trick. I wonder whether this shouldn't include a check for minimal available RAM size. Is tmpfs still a good idea for systems with little RAM? I'm thinking NSLU, m68k, older 486/Pentiums, etc.
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.