There was mention a few days back that the following still contains useful
information when it comes to reducing the amount of writing done to CF-like
systems:
http://blog.innerewut.de/2005/05/14/openbsd-3-7-on-wrap
Yet I'm puzzled by the desire/need to move /dev into mfs. The timestamp on
On Thu, 2008-04-03 at 13:05 -0700, Fred Snurd wrote:
There was mention a few days back that the following still contains useful
information when it comes to reducing the amount of writing done to CF-like
systems:
Send mea dmesg(8) and I'll send you a 4.3-current CF image built using
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Fred Snurd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yet I'm puzzled by the desire/need to move /dev into mfs. The timestamp on
the files within /dev don't change, so what is the reason for moving the
device
nodes into memory? Are there parameters which are frequently
On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 1:05 PM, Chris Kuethe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Try this:
ls -ltr /dev | tail ; date ; tty
This explains a lot. Thanks.
The article referenced discusses copying /tmp, /var, and /dev into a
memory-based filesystem. Obviously, the contents of /tmp don't need to
4 matches
Mail list logo
