On Sun, 2003-04-06 at 06:23, Olaf Marzocchi wrote: > At 23.26 05/04/2003, you wrote: > > > > Is this necessary? It takes about 30 seconds or more! > > > >there's something else wrong, it only takes about 3 seconds on my system > >after the first run. > > Could I speed it up by deleting modules I know are completely useless (now > and in the future)?
If it's taking a long time, something else is wrong. I wouldn't mess with the packaged set of modules unless you're planning to compile a new kernel. I'd also remove anything that kicks out an error -- for instance I've switched from vaiostat to gkacpi because vaiostat's module starting kicking out dependency errors at this depmod stage. ... > > > >Glad I saw this before trying to upgrade either of my servers -- they > > > >both have Voodoo3 AGP cards in them. Have you tried using 3.3.6? It was > > > >always pretty solid with the Voodoo. > > > > > > Thank you for the tip! I tried 3.3.6 but, since 4.3 worked, I chose the > > > latest. Anyway, has 3.3.6 3d support? if not, where's the advantage? > > > >you can call >1 second response time after clicking a menu working, > >personally I'd call it "format the disk and try again." 3.3.6 does have > >3d support, I used to play Quake 3 on it all the time. Sniff. I'd play > >Quake 3 on my laptop now if it didn't insist on mmap'ing /dev/dsp. > > I decided to make anotherm attempt and ... it worked! Now I can run xfree > 4.3 with 3d acceleration. I will try 3.3.6 too, I wonder whether it could > speed up apps. > Any other video card I would say to go with the latest X -- on this i810 laptop 3.3.6 is unusable, 4.2 was okay, and 4.3 is gorgeous. However, with 3dfx out of business and the cards falling by the wayside (though still quite respectable in terms of actual performance), staying back might help. If you want to test the difference, run glxgears from an xterm and see if the framerates improve on one or the other. Don't know how to measure 2d performance, but the theory would be that 3d improvements introduce 2d as well on alternate Thursdays :-) > A question: I have characters wrapped up in text consoles and I found this > hint: > > >For 2.4 kernel, you also must disable console acceleration, so arguments > >are (for example) > >'video=tdfx:[EMAIL PROTECTED] ,noaccel). Without that the characters will all > >be wrapped > >up, making console useless (but X should be fine). > > Do you ever applied this hint? have you ever had such problems? sorry, I don't use frame buffer. It's never worked on the first try and I don't care enough to find out why. > I also found this hint to enable tdfx framebuffer: > > >mknod /dev/fb0 c 29 0 > > How to know it's correct? I don't remember where I found it. devfs should be able to take care of this sort of thing for you, rather than messing with mknod. > > > > > > Another strange thing: not only kde and gnome are slower than mdk > > 9.0, but > > > > > even the whole system: for example, window maker or a simple > > "./configure" > > > > > executed in a separate shell outside xfree (runlevel 5). Could it > > depends > > > > > on the kernel? I don't know, but I find this situation very strange and > > > > > unacceptable (I mean: I will come back to mdk 9.0 and I'll try to > > upgrade > > > > > manually as much as I can). > > > > > > > > > > > > >X stuff being slow could be an xserver problem, but this sounds like > > > >something different... I don't know what though. > > > >/etc/sysconfig/harddisks? Was the system responsive before? > > > > > > The system has always been responsive ... as responsive as a cel400 with a > > > very poor chipset can be. This time, with 9.1, it's MUCH worse. > > > The problem should not be related to the harddisk: the ibm hd is now > > pio (I > > > will change it to dma soon), but the disk works only for few seconds, > > while > > > apps take many many seconds to start, after the hd has stopped working. I > > > forgot to tell that I set the hd in quietest mode, but this affects only > > > seek time (so it could probably slows down the depmod process), while, as > > > already said, apps take much to start even after the hd has finished. > > > > > > >well something is way wrong, but I don't know what it is. > > Anyway, I checked: even if dmesg tells hda is in pio mode, hdparm tells hda > is in udma4 mode, so everything is ok. > I also tried to unmask irq, but nothing changed. I get 37 MB/s from linux > cache and 17-19 MB/s when reading from disk (contiguous data...), I wonder > whether changing the setting to udma from 66 to 33 could speed up things. > After all, now I barely saturate a pio mode! (rotten chipset! and this time > is not mdk 9.1's fault). > disk throughput looks okay to me. > > > > > A question: why did you choose a -pre kernel? was it really necessary? > > > > > > > > >I'll hazard a guess that it's ACPI -- those of us with new laptops and > > > >desktops don't get working systems without good ACPI support, and 2.4.21 > > > >is definitely a lot better. > > > > > > What about preemptive patch? is it already inside? > > > > > > >Not yet, but I would expect that the 9.2 distro will have it (if it > >isn't a 2.6 kernel) > > Could kernel 2.5.66 help somewhere? or compiling 2.4.20 or 21-preX only > with specific modules? I have a very "special" box, maybe this time > recompiling will help. > it certainly is worth a try. Of course, my solution to problems like this would be to call it an excuse to pick up a new motherboard. $50 to $80 and thirty minutes of your time vs hours and hours of trying to figure it out and months and months of waiting for the software to improve... > Thanks > Olaf > > > <olaf@ kjws.com> for every kind of mail, except spam! :-) > > > > ______________________________________________________________________ > > Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? > Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com -- Jack Coates Monkeynoodle: A Scientific Venture... Are you compliant yet? ftp://ftp.rfc-editor.org/in-notes/rfc3514.txt
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
