[ previous ] [ next ] [ threads ]
 
 From:  "Lee Sharp" <leesharp at hal dash pc dot org>
 To:  <m0n0wall at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>, <m0n0wall dash dev at lists dot m0n0 dot ch>
 Subject:  Re: [m0n0wall] SUGGESTION: M0n0wall flashsize and Recommended memory
 Date:  Thu, 14 Sep 2006 15:41:37 -0500
> From: "Jonathan De Graeve" <Jonathan dot DeGraeve at imelda dot be>

> Currently we came at a point of being stuck with the limitations of
> flashsize and 64MB memory.

> According to the last survey the biggest userbase has at least 16MB
> flash.

So the RAM disk is determined by the flash size?  No way to just add a 
couple meg to the RAM disk, correct?

> In this way I'm suggesting to grow the current 7MB flashsize to 16MB.
> This will give us a lot of opportunities to overcome current
> limitations. Although the bigger flashsize has a negative effect on RAM
> usage. The current recommended is 64, it will become 96/128MB. But the
> survey tells us 27% has < 128MB and I think its possible to upgrade
> flash as wel as memory.

Keep in mind the 16MB is not always 16MB.  I would say 15MB to make sure it 
will fit on all 16MB cards.  We don't need a bunch of "But I have a 16MB 
flash..." on the list. :-)  (As you remember, I was one of those on a test 
image you made)

> People with less memory can still use the current images but people with
> the minimum amount can benefit the changes.

The way I see it, you will only add 8MB to the RAM need. So this is not that 
much a bump.  Might even still fit in 64.  But it could always start with a 
4 meg bump.  That would fit.

> This is just a suggestion which I hope will be agreed on. It's a
> trade-off for both sides.

I want it all. :-)

                                Lee