On Tue, 2008-04-08 at 09:03 -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2008 at 12:25:53PM -0400, Alan Cox wrote: > > On Thu, Apr 03, 2008 at 10:04:31AM -0400, Dave Jones wrote: > > > > Do these older/limited machines do anything better now than they did in > > > > the 2.4 kernel days? > > > > > > Good luck trying to get the installer to run on anything less than 512MB these days. > > > > Don't bother: either > > > > - Use an existing disk image and upgrade it (works in 128MB) > > Part of the selinux-policy-targeted upgrade does something whih > munches through stupid amounts of memory. On any box I've tried > this on with <512MB, the oom killer kicks in, and then I've been > left with the mess of a half upgraded box, with lots of rpms > listed twice in the rpmdb. Is this still true? There were several memory optimizations implemented in libsemanage and libsepol in time for Fedora 9, so semodule and semanage should be much less memory hungry than they were in Fedora 8. -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
