1 Oct
2012
1 Oct
'12
3:19 p.m.
On Mon, 1 Oct 2012, Mouse wrote:
That's a valid point. Stefan's Dell example is one I wasn't even thinking
about since I try to avoid such broken hardware designs at all costs and
don't generally run into such older Dell systems still in use.
Any PII and
PIII will support at a minimum 512MB of ram
Maybe the CPU will. But that's not to say the machine will. This one, I don't know; if I'd had large
enough sticks of RAM for it,
the hardware might well have supported it for all I know.
I wouldn't consider that working since it isn't really /usable/ in any
serious way.
but as long as you have swap, 32MB or 64MB would
probably work.
Oh, 32M _worked_...if you count thrashing for the better part of a day
to compile a single file as working. I don't really. In any case, I don't consider that machine
on-topic here; that was a
side note in response to something which I saw as implying that 128M was
some kind of effective minimum and that 32M was unusably little, neither
of which is true in my experience.
Meh. I once considered 16MB and then 32MB to be the usable minimum and I
once could run X11R6 on a 386DX with 32MB and swap. Today, based on my
experience, 128MB -without- swap space isn't usable for a single board
computer configured as a 2-interface router and DHCP server that includes
a caching nameserver, but 256MB got the job done.