jlc Posted September 26, 2003 Report Share Posted September 26, 2003 I did write a (typcially) long response to this but somehow it failed to post due to timing out.Then CyberJackle says it all much nicer :D (and shorter) ahh :wub: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pantoffel Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 Hi I would like to apology for my late reply. By all accounts...Debian is pretty nippy too. Ill tell you later hopefully :D And that i386. I doubt much of Gnome startup really benefits ??? Perhaps its a better dis support.... What filesystem did you use and what were you using... Strickes mer thats the most intensive part of a Gnome startup and maybe networking ???? I always create /boot partition (ext3) and the root / (reiserfs) I know that debian gnome packagers create patches. When i have time i'll read up on the patches. (source: http://www.entrouvert.be/~fred/gnome-2.4/g....4-summary.html ) Prelinking is: Most common applications make use of shared libraries. These shared libraries need to be loaded into memory at runtime and the various symbol references need to be resolved. For most small programs this dynamic linking is very quick. But for programs written in C++ and that have many library dependencies, the dynamic linking can take a fair amount of time. On most systems, libraries are not changed very often and when a program is run, the operations taken to link the program are the same every time. Prelink takes advantage of this by carrying out the linking and storing it in the executable, in effect prelinking it. In order for the linker, you need ld-linux.so in glibc; to recognize the prelinking you need >=glibc-2.3.1-r2. Prelinking can cut the startup times of applications. For example, a typical KDE program's loading time can be cut by as much as 50%. The only maintenance required is re-running prelink every time a library is upgraded for a pre-linked executable. I think this also the case for gnome and not only kde. I'm off prelinking i'll report the results soon. pantoffel :o Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest c_m_f Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 I recently built an LFS system using 2.4.20 headers and ran a 2.6 test5 kernel with gcc 3.3.1 and i really saw speed improvements, now im back in mandrake for the moment and its sooo slow, my system is a athlon XP 1800 and geforce 4 mx 440, both installs use teh nvidia drivers (2.6 patch for my LFS) and there is such a speed diffference in using the new kernel and compiled from source stuff... my next job wil be building a system with 2.6 headers (as soon as Xfree fixes the build issue for 2.6 headers) and kde 3.2, then i expect even faster speeds... oh also reiser4 will be on my next compile (it's all going to be soooo fast, it will be great :)) yup Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gowator Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 It might be the reiserfs support ??? Its just the stuff you mention like starting KDE etc. is as well as prelinking (presumably a big gain in KDE :D) but also its fairly file intensive. If you are really curious you could try screwing around with Reiserfs and set some really far out tuning things to see if its exerting a big influence. Chnage the inode ratio etc. and generally see how slow you can get it then try and tune it for max performance. If you did look at the makefiles for KDE etc. I'd be interested to see what you found :D (yeah im too lazy to look at everything :D) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roland Posted September 27, 2003 Report Share Posted September 27, 2003 fast Mandrake 9.1 ? man, you've probably never tested Mandrake 9.2 !! Youuuooo ! roland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Tux234 Posted September 28, 2003 Report Share Posted September 28, 2003 I use MEPIS linux and talk about fast. On my machine it is at least 2 to 3x faster than WindowsXP on the same box WOW!! Yes, I'm evangelizin the distro 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darkelve Posted November 17, 2003 Report Share Posted November 17, 2003 fast Mandrake 9.1 ?man, you've probably never tested Mandrake 9.2 !! Youuuooo ! roland Hey Roland, I agree, 9.2 is much faster than 9.1 on my system as well (Athlon XP box)! I wouldn't know what the heck makes it tick faster, but it's definitely a pleasant experience! Darkelve Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.