Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:12:14 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:12:07 -0400 Received: from garrincha.netbank.com.br ([200.203.199.88]:57353 "HELO netbank.com.br") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id ; Thu, 25 Oct 2001 21:11:49 -0400 Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2001 23:12:00 -0200 (BRST) From: Rik van Riel X-X-Sender: To: Luigi Genoni Cc: CaT , Marton Kadar , Subject: Re: concurrent VM subsystems In-Reply-To: Message-ID: X-spambait: aardvark@kernelnewbies.org X-spammeplease: aardvark@nl.linux.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Fri, 26 Oct 2001, Luigi Genoni wrote: > Obviously I was not meaning that desktops have not to be stable, but > they are not subjects to long uptimes, at less usually, so page aging > is, how can I say in correct english?, dealing with different > conditions... Interestingly, of all the people saying that we should have different VM systems for different situations, NOBODY has managed to point out what specific things should be different. The current situation of having 2 competing VMs seems to work out nicely, though. Especially when ideas get merged all the time. regards, Rik -- DMCA, SSSCA, W3C? Who cares? http://thefreeworld.net/ http://www.surriel.com/ http://distro.conectiva.com/ - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/