sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
- From: Robin Sheat <robin AT kallisti.net.nz>
- To: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Re: Kernel 2.4 vs 2.6
- Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2004 21:52:40 +1200
On Wed, Mar 31, 2004 at 08:06:32AM +0000, Mathieu L wrote:
> I'd like to know for those who have tried 2.6 if they really think it's
> worth it for a workstation only? Is there any drawback compared to 2.4?
> According to the article, 2.6 seems to be a bit slower to compile stuff,
> isn't that quite relevant for Sourcemage running on a workstation?
Depends. In 2.6, I find large programs like Mozilla pull themselves out of
swap a lot faster, but heavy CPU usage by some things (like konq rendering
a page) is prone to causing my music player to skip. However, for a desktop
system, I think it is overall a bit better.
--
Robin <robin AT kallisti.net.nz> JabberID: <eythian AT jabber.org>
Hostes alienigeni me abduxerunt. Qui annus est?
PGP Key 0x776DB663 Fingerprint=DD10 5C62 1E29 A385 9866 0853 CD38 E07A 776D
B663
Attachment:
pgpWvK_Ri2Bul.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-
[SM-Discuss] Re: Kernel 2.4 vs 2.6,
Mathieu L, 03/31/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Re: Kernel 2.4 vs 2.6, VladimĂr Marek, 03/31/2004
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Re: Kernel 2.4 vs 2.6,
Robin Sheat, 03/31/2004
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Re: Kernel 2.4 vs 2.6, Arwed von Merkatz, 03/31/2004
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.