List Info

Thread: kernel
kernel
user name
 2006-01-29 16:45:42 

  


  

    
I notice that I ended up with kernel 2.6.12-1-386



It seems slow right now.



Is this what I should have for an AMD 2400+ chip? Or should I look at
686 or K7?





-- 
As scarce as the truth is, the supply has always
been in excess of the demand.

                                Josh Billings



  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    kernel
  


  

     user name

     2006-01-29 20:53:45
  


  

    

  


  

    
larry wrote:

longwire.com" type="cite">
  
  
  I notice that I ended up with kernel 2.6.12-1-386

  

It seems slow right now.

  

Is this what I should have for an AMD 2400+ chip? Or should I look at
686 or K7?

  

The 386 kernel won't make use of any of the AMD's optomizations.  Will
that be noticable, I don't know.

I've seen more impact from applications spinning the CPU out of
control.  

What's running when you notice the slow-downs?



Chuck


  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    kernel
  


  

     user name

     2006-01-29 22:15:50
  


  

    

  


  

    
I am judging by how fast Nautilus runs. As I open it, navigate around,
hit a file to edit it, etc. it takes longer to start up, longer to
paint the screen, longer to change directories. 



Now that I think of it, that could all be disk, but when I boot it into
Ubuntu, the disk I am running is only marginally faster, 15K instead of
10K, that really doesn't translate to a significant difference. What I
really should do is check the Ubuntu kernel version, yeah.



Chuck Stickelman wrote:

neo.rr.com" type="cite">
  
larry wrote:
  
longwire.com" type="cite">
    
    
    I notice that I ended up with kernel 2.6.12-1-386

    

It seems slow right now.

    

Is this what I should have for an AMD 2400+ chip? Or should I look at
686 or K7?

    

The 386 kernel won't make use of any of the AMD's optomizations.  Will
that be noticable, I don't know.

I've seen more impact from applications spinning the CPU out of
control.  

What's running when you notice the slow-downs?

  

Chuck








-- 
As scarce as the truth is, the supply has always
been in excess of the demand.

                                Josh Billings



  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    kernel
  


  

     user name

     2006-01-29 22:29:25
  


  

    

  


  

    
Never mind, I decided it's my imagination. Ubuntu is 2.6.12-9-386 and
Etch is 2.6.12-10-386. 



But I do wish I could figure out how to set the $DISPLAY variable (for
root) automatically.



larry wrote:

longwire.com" type="cite">
  
  
I am judging by how fast Nautilus runs. As I open it, navigate around,
hit a file to edit it, etc. it takes longer to start up, longer to
paint the screen, longer to change directories. 

  

Now that I think of it, that could all be disk, but when I boot it into
Ubuntu, the disk I am running is only marginally faster, 15K instead of
10K, that really doesn't translate to a significant difference. What I
really should do is check the Ubuntu kernel version, yeah.

  

Chuck Stickelman wrote:
  
neo.rr.com" type="cite">
    
larry wrote:
    
longwire.com" type="cite">
      
      
      I notice that I ended up with kernel 2.6.12-1-386

      

It seems slow right now.

      

Is this what I should have for an AMD 2400+ chip? Or should I look at
686 or K7?

      

The 386 kernel won't make use of any of the AMD's optomizations.  Will
that be noticable, I don't know.

I've seen more impact from applications spinning the CPU out of
control.  

What's running when you notice the slow-downs?

    

Chuck

  

  

  

  
-- 
As scarce as the truth is, the supply has always
been in excess of the demand.

                                Josh Billings
  

All list settings can be controlled at
http://www.freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi
To unsubscribe send to freelists.org">ncolug-requestfreelists.org with 'unsubscribe'
in the Subject field.







-- 
As scarce as the truth is, the supply has always
been in excess of the demand.

                                Josh Billings



  

  
  
   
     
    

  

    kernel
  


  

     user name

     2006-01-30 20:53:15
  


  

    
On Sunday 29 January 2006 11:45, larry wrote:
> I notice that I ended up with kernel 2.6.12-1-386
>
>  It seems slow right now.
>
>  Is this what I should have for an AMD 2400+ chip? Or
should I look at 686
> or K7?

I'd recommend at least going to a 686 kernel. Using a 386
gives the most 
compatibility should you need to move your drive to another
computer, but 
lacks any of the newer optimizations and features.

Building your own kernel will result in the best
performance, but you might 
want to looking to your distros choice of sources before you
do.
All list settings can be controlled at http://www.
freelists.org/cgi-bin/lsg2.cgi

To unsubscribe send to ncolug-requestfreelists.org with
'unsubscribe' in the Subject field.



  


  

    
  

  
  
   
     
    






 [1-5]











   
 





about | contact  Other archives ( Real Estate discussion Medical topics )