🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Aug14.222104.6931@qiclab.scn.rain.com> 70465.203@compuserve.com writes:
>100 meg? The only BBSes I know of that have HDs that big either have 
>*large* file areas, or are Fido hubs. 
>
>We run a busy system on a 286 with an 80 meg HD (donated) that is less
>than 1/2 full. And includes a lot of non-BBS stuff (like the TP 5.5
>compiler/debugge and assembler so I can work on utilities on the
>same system)

I run Max on a 286 with 240 Megs.  I am neither a hub, or have a large file
area (unless 60 megs is large).  One thing that a large hard drive enables you
to do is keep your disk from massive fragmentation.  Tossing messages to areas
cause lots of fragmentation which is lessened by more free diskspace.

>
>The BBS probably uses around 20 megs. This is QuickBBS 2.76 gamma-2 
>and D'Bridge 1.30 as a mailer.

What do you mean by "The BBS"?  I run Max, FD, Squish, and so many utils I can't
remember them all, each of which only use about 30-40K but all together add
up to a bit.  These utils don't compensate for missing things in anything,
but add to the "environment" of the BBS and make it a great place to be.
>
>The QuickBBS style message base saves a *lot* of room.

So does Squish.

Anyway, yes, one can operate on a small HD, but soon enough everyone says
"Boy it would be nice if I had..." and low and behold you actually do.

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
  Internet: robert@revcan.rct.ca                Hell On A Disk BBS
  FidoNet: Robert Presland (1:243/27)           (613) 569-0290 * CSP/V32b
----------------------------------------------------------------------------