On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Alex Stapleton <[email protected]> wrote:
> The main reason for smaller libraries is to save RAM. I think that even today > a > few hundred MB of SLC Flash and DRAM would not make the cost targets > impossible and by the time a FB makes it to market... Depends a bit who our target market is. I live in China where $500 a month would be a fine salary offer for a new university graduate. Will they be willing to spend a week's salary on a plug computer for this? There are lots of people here who make far less, and there are other countries with even lower numbers. Arguably, some of them are politically the ones most in need of Freedom Boxes. > E.g. I am currently working with an industrial ARM9 SCADA system with > 64MB of RAM and 128MB of Flash and no swap. ... > I dont really think that the memory pressure will be high enough to > make the use of embedded libraries a requirement unless you really > want to fit everything on a cheap MIPS WiFi AP. Nor do I, but the question still seemed worth asking. On the one hand, a couple of decades ago a Sun III was a high-end server that people ran whole companies on. Top-of-the-line had 32 megs of RAM and a 25 MHz CPU. It is not clear to me that a Freedom Box actually needs much more than that, except of course that if you want to share media files, that requires space. On the other hand, today's plug computer is an order of magnitude or more better in all areas, so why not design for that? Even then, though we may have to trim some. du -h on my desktop Ubunutu box says /bin is 6.7 megs and /usr 4.9 gigs. _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
