On 20 April 2009 G. 11:38:19 Stuart Henderson wrote: > there certainly are size restrictions on RAMDISK_CD.
Sorry for stupid questions, but what those restrictions are and what is the reason for them? It's not the disk space, obviously. And if RAMDISK_CD kernel could not load into memory then this machine will not be much usable using GENERIC one either; administrator of this system will compile it's own kernels anyway to free some more space in RAM... May be I'm too far from reality in my house; yesterday it was still snow falling in my window... :) Then I send my apologies to anyone who's machine will not be usable after adding RAIDFrame into stock kernel. > On 2009-04-19, Vadim Zhukov <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hello all. > > > > Is there any particular reason to not have RAIDFrame built-in in > > RAMDISK_CD kernels? I mean, are there any restrictions, except > > kernel/ramdisk size, which are not the case with RAMDISK_CD, > > obviously? > > > > Maybe I missed something digging through Google output containing a > > lot of links to official FAQ and quotes from it. :( -- Best wishes, Vadim Zhukov A: Because it messes up the way people read text. Q: Why is a top-posting such a bad thing?
