Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-17 Thread ges...@ftp83plus.net 


Lets use real facts as opposed to your subjective feelings...
> 
> https://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/is-it-true-that-iphones-get-slower-over-time
> 
> Apple does NOT intentional make their own older devices run slower than they 
> otherwise could. That is nonsense conspiracies. What they do do is release 
> new technicalities with each OS release that are better optimised for the 
> newer hardware. Apple has never been backwards in that regard. But that is 
> quite different to intentional making their devices perform worse.

Apple doesn't have a stellar record when it comes to backwards-compatibility, 
either. With the accelerated rate of Mac OS X releases, it is common for 
existing workflows and software to break unexpectedly. The recent version of 
Disk Utility is more difficult to use. The identical icons for both USB, 
FireWire drives and disk images, dots instead of highlight for colour tagging 
makes using it harder than it used to be.

Last example I had in mind is the latest iTunes where the App Store has been 
removed, that require the user to have a working iOS 10 device with enough free 
memory for updates. That indirectly excludes the common 8GB iPhone 5c, where 
iOS leaves only about 5GB. All because of one software upgrade on MacOSX.

But your hypothesis of added functionality (that can't be turned off, otherwise 
it wouldn't be so much of an issue) does hold water.

Against my own suggestion, this current iPhone 5c didn't show much of a 
performance downgrade when I was forced to update it from iOS 8 to 9. But I 
have yet to put iOS 11 since it is impossible to downgrade should it fail to 
deliver.

> 
>> These symptoms raise more than one hypothesis:
>> 1- Is FF simply better written on Windows 7 than on Snow Leopard than on El 
>> Capitan?
> 
> Ask Mozilla.
> 
>> 2- Is Snow Leopard simply better than El Capitan at managing resources, 
>> especially when scarce?
> 
> Unlikely.

Still, I do see more free memory, proportionally, on Snow leopard than I do on 
10.11.6, and rather high memory pressure. Would the "compressed
Memory" feature actually use more CPU than the previous system?

> 
>> 4- more specifically, would fan speed be set based on the CPU load /trend/, 
>> rather than actual temperature? Assuming "preventive cooling" to be more 
>> efficient on recent laptops that have less air flow due to thinness, while 
>> having cooler, more efficient CPUs).
> 
> No idea. The fans on my devices have always turned on when its under load, 
> and getting hot, and turned off afterwards. Nothing more complicated than 
> that.

Maybe the newer Mac OS X were written with those recent laptop models in mind 
where the fan can be turned off completely? Forgetting older models have a 
constantly running fan?

In fact, I looked for and could never find a definitive answer what was the 
normal temperature range for a Core 2 Duo 2.13GHz. The maximum operating 
temperature is set at 105C by Intel, but, in absence of a more precise measure, 
I "feel" it throttling far below, around 75C as the computer becomes unbearably 
sluggish, though it can shoot over 100C  after a cold boot when applications 
automatically restart.

There aren't much MacBook5,2 still in use that I could compare mine to.

> 
>> 5- is the GM version of 10.11 actually different from the regular version?
> 
> Of course it is. 10.11 has a number of minor updates size the first release...

My mistake, it runs 10.11.6, not 10.11.0 :)

> 
>> 6- has Apple actually set a lower safe temperature for its MacBook5,2 than 
>> it did for the MacBookPro8,1, increasing fan speed starting at an 
>> unrealistically low 59C rather than 70C (idle temp is about 55C on both)
> 
> For sure the thermal limits vary by device. I tend to assume Apple knows what 
> it is doing in this regard...
> 
> Chris

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Dave Horsfall 

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Ryan Schmidt wrote:

The High Sierra buildbot worker is still busy building ports. If you 
want to have a higher probability that you can receive binaries from us, 
instead of having to build from source, don't upgrade yet. Same goes for 
High Sierra-specific build failures of specific ports that we haven't 
fixed or even discovered yet. If you want a higher probability that we 
find and fix those problems, wait.


Thanks; I'm happy to wait, as this thing is horribly underpowered.

--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Dave Horsfall 

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Chris Jones wrote:


Correction... It was sent to the users and *announce* mailing lists.


Wasn't in -users, but I did find it in -announce (to which I've just 
subscribed).


--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Dave Horsfall 

On Fri, 13 Oct 2017, Dave Horsfall wrote:

Yes, you did miss it. The announcement was sent out on the 8th Octo to 
both the user and devel lists. Search for the message "MacPorts 2.4.2 
has been released" which I guess is clear enough ;)


Hmmm...  I don't recall seeing it, so I must be getting forgetful in my 
old age :-(


I can't find that message in the archives; got a pointer to it?

--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Dave Horsfall 

On Thu, 12 Oct 2017, Chris Jones wrote:

Yes, you did miss it. The announcement was sent out on the 8th Octo to 
both the user and devel lists. Search for the message "MacPorts 2.4.2 
has been released" which I guess is clear enough ;)


Hmmm...  I don't recall seeing it, so I must be getting forgetful in my 
old age :-(


Now to gird my loins, study the upgrade guide *very* carefully, etc; I've 
bitten myself a few times by skipping the occasional step, thinking that 
is was redundant...


Thanks.

--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread William H. Magill 
On Oct 12, 2017, at 11:04 AM, ges...@ftp83plus.net wrote:
> 
> The issue is the fan speed(=noise) and CPU usage (to a lesser degree), not so 
> much temperature.
> 
> 4- more specifically, would fan speed be set based on the CPU load trend, 
> rather than actual temperature? Assuming "preventive cooling" to be more 
> efficient on recent laptops that have less air flow due to thinness, while 
> having cooler, more efficient CPUs).

On my iMac11,3 Core i7 [2.93GHz - 8 GB 1067MHz] OS X 10.13 I find that the fan 
hardly ever runs. . .
except if I have run the latest TechTool Pro 9, and let it check the fans and 
sensors!
TTP winds them up to max as part of its testing, but then leaves them running!


I have a self-installed SSD in this iMac, so I use "SSD Fan Control.app” (free 
from http://exirion.net/ssdfanctrl/) to get the fans to behave again - 
switching from Auto to Smart control. I have a Samsung SSD.

I should add — the room where my iMac is located has  pretty constant ambient 
air temp of 71 degrees.


T.T.F.N.
William H. Magill
# iMac11,3 Core i7 [2.93GHz - 8 GB 1067MHz] OS X 10.13
# Macmini6,1 Intel Core i5 [2.5 Ghz - 4GB 1600MHz] OS X 10.13

mag...@icloud.com
mag...@mac.com
whmag...@gmail.com

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Chris Jones 


Lets use real facts as opposed to your subjective feelings...

https://www.futuremark.com/pressreleases/is-it-true-that-iphones-get-slower-over-time

Apple does NOT intentional make their own older devices run slower than 
they otherwise could. That is nonsense conspiracies. What they do do is 
release new technicalities with each OS release that are better 
optimised for the newer hardware. Apple has never been backwards in that 
regard. But that is quite different to intentional making their devices 
perform worse.




These symptoms raise more than one hypothesis:
1- Is FF simply better written on Windows 7 than on Snow Leopard than on 
El Capitan?


Ask Mozilla.



2- Is Snow Leopard simply better than El Capitan at managing resources, 
especially when scarce?


Unlikely.



3- Has Apple, voluntarily or not, introduced functions in recent Mac OS 
X that work well on same-generation hardware but tends to cripple the old?


Quite probably. Natural evolution of an OS, nothing nasty here.



4- more specifically, would fan speed be set based on the CPU load 
/trend/, rather than actual temperature? Assuming "preventive cooling" 
to be more efficient on recent laptops that have less air flow due to 
thinness, while having cooler, more efficient CPUs).


No idea. The fans on my devices have always turned on when its under 
load, and getting hot, and turned off afterwards. Nothing more 
complicated than that.




5- is the GM version of 10.11 actually different from the regular version?


Of course it is. 10.11 has a number of minor updates size the first 
release...




6- has Apple actually set a lower safe temperature for its MacBook5,2 
than it did for the MacBookPro8,1, increasing fan speed starting at an 
unrealistically low 59C rather than 70C (idle temp is about 55C on both)


For sure the thermal limits vary by device. I tend to assume Apple knows 
what it is doing in this regard...


Chris

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread ges...@ftp83plus.net 
I'd love to be proved wrong, but my experience with different Apple devices  
says otherwise. iPhone 3GS suddenly got painfully slow after the latest 
compatible iOS. MacBook5,2 much slower after the latest compatible MacOSX 
version. iPad 2 much slower after the latest compatible iOS version. Plus the 
continuing inability to downgrade iOS on many devices. Plus the similar 
experience of other users on different forums. Plus the ever-increasing price 
tag of recent devices compared with the older ones, often with reduced 
functionality (much smaller storage space and no upgrade ability on current 
MacBooks, for instance - I quickly calculated that getting the same RAM-storage 
combination on a new MBP would cost at least $700 more than I paid for my 
"daily driver", including hardware upgrades but excluding an expensive coffee 
spill.).

I don't believe in conspiracies, but such symptoms similarity between different 
devices / usage combination across the net is interesting and lead me to think 
this COULD be intentional. You're right the suspicion itself isn't helpful, but 
since what I describe is not uncommon, I hope we could pick each other's brain 
over the problem.

30-40 tabs on Firefox doesn't seem to much on a 8GB-RAM and indeed, memory 
pressure is most often in the green. Most of tabs are text, maybe 2-3 are 
video. For reference, on my "daily driver" (16GB-RAM, Snow Leopard) 150 tabs is 
not uncommon. Still, fan speed is lower, temperature is higher. FWIW, my gf's 
early-2014 Lenovo (8GB) barely speeds up its fan with her unreasonable 500 tabs 
(no typo: five HUNDRED, actually ranges from 200 to 700) but otherwise similar 
usage scenario. All three CPUs have the same safe design temperature  of 105C, 
and will shutdown with no warning if going over.

TL;DR

Closing FF altogether does help a small bit, but the fan never goes down to 
minimum speed under light usage (wired network for different shares, Preview 
opened with 4-5 small PDFs files, LibreOffice for text documents, Mail and 
iCal). Fan is about 3500-4000rpm @ 63C instead of 6200rpm @ 65C with FF. Or 
2000rpm@60C when closing all applications. There doesn't seem to be much of a 
correlation between load, temperature and fan speed.

Even when I ran this computer with the top case removed while waiting for a 
keyboard replacement, fan speed was still often max though temperature was 
obviously lower.

For sure I don't recall a noisy, hot or sluggish computer in years past under 
previous Mac OS X versions with a similar usage scenario. I thought about 
installing Mavericks on a different drive and using it for a while, but for 
some reason 10.11.6 doesn't recognize an external drive cloned with installer 
.dmg file to be a valid boot drive - never seen this issue before.

The issue is the fan speed(=noise) and CPU usage (to a lesser degree), not so 
much temperature.

These symptoms raise more than one hypothesis:
1- Is FF simply better written on Windows 7 than on Snow Leopard than on El 
Capitan?

2- Is Snow Leopard simply better than El Capitan at managing resources, 
especially when scarce?

3- Has Apple, voluntarily or not, introduced functions in recent Mac OS X that 
work well on same-generation hardware but tends to cripple the old?

4- more specifically, would fan speed be set based on the CPU load trend, 
rather than actual temperature? Assuming "preventive cooling" to be more 
efficient on recent laptops that have less air flow due to thinness, while 
having cooler, more efficient CPUs).

5- is the GM version of 10.11 actually different from the regular version?

6- has Apple actually set a lower safe temperature for its MacBook5,2 than it 
did for the MacBookPro8,1, increasing fan speed starting at an unrealistically 
low 59C rather than 70C (idle temp is about 55C on both)

Enviado desde mi iPhone

> El 12 oct 2017, a las 4:25, Chris Jones  escribió:
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12/10/17 03:27, [ftp83plus] wrote:
>> Already did. No difference.
>> I am beginning to suspect that Apple did this on purpose to push users to 
>> buy new hardware. Just as it does crippling iPhone with bloated iOS.
> 
> Please stop make FUD like comments like this, they are no help (and also 
> wrong, but I won't go into that now).
> 
> Have you tried turning firefox off to see what happens ? You said you leave 
> it running with a lot of open tabs. My experience is FF can be a real 
> resource hog.
> 
> Anyway, this discussion is nothing to do with MacPorts so please end it here, 
> and take it to a more appropriate forum elsewhere.
> 
> Chris
> 
>>> El 11 oct 2017, a las 20:18, Clemens Lang  escribió:
>>> 
>>> On October 10, 2017 10:25:12 PM GMT+02:00, "[ftp83plus]" 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
 Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins
 loudly, reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan
 Control. What is strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly
 linked to the temperature.
>>> 
>>> If you haven't tried th

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Rainer Müller 
On 2017-10-12 12:02, Chris Jones wrote:
> See
> 
> https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-announce/2017-October/date.html
> 
> 
> Maybe its not in the below because it was sent to the announce list, and
> cc'ed to users ?

Sorry, that was my fault. The announce for 2.4.2 was meant to be sent to
the users list.

Somehow I managed to make a mistake in the address format putting the
macports-dev list twice into the CC header instead of also including
macports-users.

Rainer

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Ryan Schmidt 

On Oct 12, 2017, at 07:02, db wrote:

> On 12 Oct 2017, at 12:51, Ryan Schmidt wrote:
>> https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-users/2017-September/043743.html
>> The High Sierra buildbot worker is still busy building ports. If you want to 
>> have a higher probability that you can receive binaries from us, instead of 
>> having to build from source, don't upgrade yet. Same goes for High 
>> Sierra-specific build failures of specific ports that we haven't fixed or 
>> even discovered yet. If you want a higher probability that we find and fix 
>> those problems, wait.
> 
> In which order is the High Sierra buildbot building the binaries?

As changes are committed to them. When there is a lull, we manually schedule 
batches of ports. The method of choosing which ports to schedule is somewhat 
undefined. If there is a port you would like to have built, let me know and 
I'll schedule it. For the past several days, it has been busy building all 
python modules.


> How long does it take for all ports to build, in case it's set to do so?

We do not have an easy way to schedule a build of all ports right now. And if 
we attempted to do so, it would take several weeks to do.


I'm writing a longer email about this topic and some of the difficulties, which 
will be posted on the macports-dev mailing list shortly.

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread db 
On 12 Oct 2017, at 12:51, Ryan Schmidt  wrote:
> https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-users/2017-September/043743.html
> The High Sierra buildbot worker is still busy building ports. If you want to 
> have a higher probability that you can receive binaries from us, instead of 
> having to build from source, don't upgrade yet. Same goes for High 
> Sierra-specific build failures of specific ports that we haven't fixed or 
> even discovered yet. If you want a higher probability that we find and fix 
> those problems, wait.

In which order is the High Sierra buildbot building the binaries? How long does 
it take for all ports to build, in case it's set to do so?

Firefox and memory (was: Re: High Sierra and MacPorts)

2017-10-12 Thread Michael 

On 2017-10-10, at 1:25 PM, [ftp83plus]  wrote:

> I won’t criticise the typos after reading my own grammar…;-)
> 
> As for the processes, I often see kernel_task taking a rather large chunk of 
> CPU. At the moment it’s hovering around 27%, but that’s an exception rather 
> than the rule. Most of the time it’s just Firefox eating about 20% CPU doing 
> nothing else than keeping 30-40 tabs open (found out by trial-and-error it 
> takes more CPU to reload them when clicked (Autounload tab add-on) than it 
> does keeping them loaded (now RAM isn’t too scarce).

For me, I can consistently free up 8 GB of memory by quitting firefox after 
watching youtube videos and getting a performance decrease. Enabling 
multi-process mode did not help -- it's not the tabs taking up the memory in my 
case.

In other words, I can close the window (not just the tab), the memory is still 
used, I close firefox, and between the drop in real memory and the drop in 
swapspace, I recover between 7 and 9 GB.

---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce

Firefox and memory (was: Re: High Sierra and MacPorts)

2017-10-12 Thread Michael 

On 2017-10-10, at 1:25 PM, [ftp83plus]  wrote:

> I won’t criticise the typos after reading my own grammar…;-)
> 
> As for the processes, I often see kernel_task taking a rather large chunk of 
> CPU. At the moment it’s hovering around 27%, but that’s an exception rather 
> than the rule. Most of the time it’s just Firefox eating about 20% CPU doing 
> nothing else than keeping 30-40 tabs open (found out by trial-and-error it 
> takes more CPU to reload them when clicked (Autounload tab add-on) than it 
> does keeping them loaded (now RAM isn’t too scarce).

For me, I can consistently free up 8 GB of memory by quitting firefox after 
watching youtube videos and getting a performance decrease. Enabling 
multi-process mode did not help -- it's not the tabs taking up the memory in my 
case.

In other words, I can close the window (not just the tab), the memory is still 
used, I close firefox, and between the drop in real memory and the drop in 
swapspace, I recover between 7 and 9 GB.

---
Entertaining minecraft videos
http://YouTube.com/keybounce

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Ryan Schmidt 

On Oct 8, 2017, at 20:04, Dave Horsfall wrote:

> Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?

MacPorts 2.4.2 fixed a bug seen only on High Sierra with ports that want to 
install files with the setuid bit set. A very small set of ports, but important 
to fix nonetheless.

The rest of my message still applies:

https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-users/2017-September/043743.html

The High Sierra buildbot worker is still busy building ports. If you want to 
have a higher probability that you can receive binaries from us, instead of 
having to build from source, don't upgrade yet. Same goes for High 
Sierra-specific build failures of specific ports that we haven't fixed or even 
discovered yet. If you want a higher probability that we find and fix those 
problems, wait.

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Chris Jones 

See

https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-announce/2017-October/date.html

Maybe its not in the below because it was sent to the announce list, and 
cc'ed to users ?


In any case, if you want to get notifications like this, make sure you 
are signed up to the annouce list, as well as users.


Chris

On 12/10/17 09:42, Dominik Reichardt wrote:
I don't know what went wrong but I didn't see the announcement here in 
the user list, nor the announcement for the previous release.
And at least for 2.4.2 neither did the list archive 
https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-users/2017-October/date.html



Am 12.10.2017 um 10:28 schrieb Chris Jones >:





On 12/10/17 09:27, Chris Jones wrote:

On 12/10/17 00:04, Dave Horsfall wrote:

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017, Dave Horsfall wrote:

Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it 
likely to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook 
than before?


Well, that generated a fascinating discussion, but it didn't answer 
my questions...  If there was an announcement about MacPorts 2.4.2 
then I guess I must've missed it.
Yes, you did miss it. The announcement was sent out on the 8th Octo 
to both the user and devel lists. Search for the message "MacPorts 
2.4.2 has been released" which I guess is clear enough ;)


Correction... It was sent to the users and *announce* mailing lists.

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Dominik Reichardt 
I don't know what went wrong but I didn't see the announcement here in the user 
list, nor the announcement for the previous release.
And at least for 2.4.2 neither did the list archive 
https://lists.macports.org/pipermail/macports-users/2017-October/date.html


> Am 12.10.2017 um 10:28 schrieb Chris Jones :
> 
> 
> 
>> On 12/10/17 09:27, Chris Jones wrote:
>>> On 12/10/17 00:04, Dave Horsfall wrote:
 On Mon, 9 Oct 2017, Dave Horsfall wrote:
 
 Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely 
 to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
>>> 
>>> Well, that generated a fascinating discussion, but it didn't answer my 
>>> questions...  If there was an announcement about MacPorts 2.4.2 then I 
>>> guess I must've missed it.
>> Yes, you did miss it. The announcement was sent out on the 8th Octo to both 
>> the user and devel lists. Search for the message "MacPorts 2.4.2 has been 
>> released" which I guess is clear enough ;)
> 
> Correction... It was sent to the users and *announce* mailing lists.

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Chris Jones 



On 12/10/17 09:27, Chris Jones wrote:



On 12/10/17 00:04, Dave Horsfall wrote:

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017, Dave Horsfall wrote:

Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it 
likely to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than 
before?


Well, that generated a fascinating discussion, but it didn't answer my 
questions...  If there was an announcement about MacPorts 2.4.2 then I 
guess I must've missed it.


Yes, you did miss it. The announcement was sent out on the 8th Octo to 
both the user and devel lists. Search for the message "MacPorts 2.4.2 
has been released" which I guess is clear enough ;)


Correction... It was sent to the users and *announce* mailing lists.

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Chris Jones 



On 12/10/17 00:04, Dave Horsfall wrote:

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017, Dave Horsfall wrote:

Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it 
likely to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than 
before?


Well, that generated a fascinating discussion, but it didn't answer my 
questions...  If there was an announcement about MacPorts 2.4.2 then I 
guess I must've missed it.


Yes, you did miss it. The announcement was sent out on the 8th Octo to 
both the user and devel lists. Search for the message "MacPorts 2.4.2 
has been released" which I guess is clear enough ;)

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-12 Thread Chris Jones 



On 12/10/17 03:27, [ftp83plus] wrote:

Already did. No difference.

I am beginning to suspect that Apple did this on purpose to push users to buy 
new hardware. Just as it does crippling iPhone with bloated iOS.


Please stop make FUD like comments like this, they are no help (and also 
wrong, but I won't go into that now).


Have you tried turning firefox off to see what happens ? You said you 
leave it running with a lot of open tabs. My experience is FF can be a 
real resource hog.


Anyway, this discussion is nothing to do with MacPorts so please end it 
here, and take it to a more appropriate forum elsewhere.


Chris




El 11 oct 2017, a las 20:18, Clemens Lang  escribió:

On October 10, 2017 10:25:12 PM GMT+02:00, "[ftp83plus]"  
wrote:


Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins
loudly, reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan
Control. What is strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly
linked to the temperature.


If you haven't tried that already, try resetting your SMC. It has solved 
similar problems with my MacBook before.
Hi,
--
Clemens Lang

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-11 Thread [ftp83plus] 
From experience, Macs Fan Control seems to work a tad better than 
smcFanControl. But that doesn’t solve the base issue of why so much CPU is 
being used, and why the fan doesn’t increase in speed along with CPU 
temperature.


> El 11 oct 2017, a las 22:35, Ken Cunningham  
> escribió:
> 
> This can be useful for overriding fan control, I've found:
> 
> https://github.com/hholtmann/smcFanControl
> 
> Watch your temps, tho.
> 
> K
> 
> 
> On 2017-10-11, at 7:27 PM, [ftp83plus] wrote:
> 
>> Already did. No difference.
>> 
>> I am beginning to suspect that Apple did this on purpose to push users to 
>> buy new hardware. Just as it does crippling iPhone with bloated iOS.
>> 
>>> El 11 oct 2017, a las 20:18, Clemens Lang  escribió:
>>> 
>>> On October 10, 2017 10:25:12 PM GMT+02:00, "[ftp83plus]" 
>>>  wrote:
>>> 
 Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins
 loudly, reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan
 Control. What is strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly
 linked to the temperature.
>>> 
>>> If you haven't tried that already, try resetting your SMC. It has solved 
>>> similar problems with my MacBook before.
>>> Hi,
>>> -- 
>>> Clemens Lang
>> 
>

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-11 Thread Ken Cunningham 
This can be useful for overriding fan control, I've found:

https://github.com/hholtmann/smcFanControl

Watch your temps, tho.

K


On 2017-10-11, at 7:27 PM, [ftp83plus] wrote:

> Already did. No difference.
> 
> I am beginning to suspect that Apple did this on purpose to push users to buy 
> new hardware. Just as it does crippling iPhone with bloated iOS.
> 
>> El 11 oct 2017, a las 20:18, Clemens Lang  escribió:
>> 
>> On October 10, 2017 10:25:12 PM GMT+02:00, "[ftp83plus]" 
>>  wrote:
>> 
>>> Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins
>>> loudly, reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan
>>> Control. What is strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly
>>> linked to the temperature.
>> 
>> If you haven't tried that already, try resetting your SMC. It has solved 
>> similar problems with my MacBook before.
>> Hi,
>> -- 
>> Clemens Lang
>

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-11 Thread [ftp83plus] 
Already did. No difference.

I am beginning to suspect that Apple did this on purpose to push users to buy 
new hardware. Just as it does crippling iPhone with bloated iOS.

> El 11 oct 2017, a las 20:18, Clemens Lang  escribió:
> 
> On October 10, 2017 10:25:12 PM GMT+02:00, "[ftp83plus]" 
>  wrote:
> 
>> Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins
>> loudly, reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan
>> Control. What is strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly
>> linked to the temperature.
> 
> If you haven't tried that already, try resetting your SMC. It has solved 
> similar problems with my MacBook before.
> Hi,
> -- 
> Clemens Lang

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-11 Thread Clemens Lang 
On October 10, 2017 10:25:12 PM GMT+02:00, "[ftp83plus]"  
wrote:

>Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins
>loudly, reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan
>Control. What is strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly
>linked to the temperature.

If you haven't tried that already, try resetting your SMC. It has solved 
similar problems with my MacBook before.
Hi,
-- 
Clemens Lang

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-11 Thread Dave Horsfall 

On Mon, 9 Oct 2017, Dave Horsfall wrote:

Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it 
likely to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than 
before?


Well, that generated a fascinating discussion, but it didn't answer my 
questions...  If there was an announcement about MacPorts 2.4.2 then I 
guess I must've missed it.


--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-10 Thread [ftp83plus] 
I won’t criticise the typos after reading my own grammar…;-)

As for the processes, I often see kernel_task taking a rather large chunk of 
CPU. At the moment it’s hovering around 27%, but that’s an exception rather 
than the rule. Most of the time it’s just Firefox eating about 20% CPU doing 
nothing else than keeping 30-40 tabs open (found out by trial-and-error it 
takes more CPU to reload them when clicked (Autounload tab add-on) than it does 
keeping them loaded (now RAM isn’t too scarce).

I tried to reinstall from scratch a few weeks ago, restoring only the 
documents, configured the rest, to no avail. 

On the hardware side, I re-seated the heatsink, after cleaning the old thermal 
paste and put new one (G751). Of course I removed the dust bunnies :) That was 
about 6 months ago.

Still, even with a relatively low temperature (65C-so) the fan spins loudly, 
reaches max speed at 70C (read from CPU diode with Macs Fan Control. What is 
strange is the speed doesn’t seem to be directly linked to the temperature.



> El 10 oct 2017, a las 6:41, Chris Jones  escribió:
> 
> 
> 
> On 10/10/17 09:37, Chris Jones wrote:
>> Have you running activity monitor to see what process is running, if there 
>> is one ? What you describe is not normal, for any is version. You have some 
>> process mid behaving.
> 
> OK, that is far too many typos, even for me...
> 
> "have you tried running activity monitor to see what process is running,  if 
> there is one ? What you describe is not normal, for any OS version. You 
> (probably) have some process mis-behaving."
> 
> falling that, have you tried cleaning out your mac book of dust bunnies etc. 
> ? If you have never done it it is likely jam packed with dust and this can 
> have a serious effect on the cooling system, causing the fans to run a lot 
> more than then otherwise would.
> 
>>> On 10 Oct 2017, at 2:52 am, [ftp83plus]  wrote:
>>> 
>>> What MacBook is that? I have the MacBook5,2 maxed out with 8GB RAM, 
>>> currently on 10.11.6, and it’s a pain. The fan is always at maximum speed, 
>>> even though CPU usage isn’t that high. Very tiring to work on.
>>> 
>>> What Mac OS X version works well on this model, and would still be 
>>> reasonably compatible with modern software?
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
 El 8 oct 2017, a las 21:04, Dave Horsfall  escribió:
 
 Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely 
 to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
 
 Thanks.
 
 -- 
 Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will 
 suffer."
>>>

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-10 Thread Chris Jones 



On 10/10/17 09:37, Chris Jones wrote:


Have you running activity monitor to see what process is running, if there is 
one ? What you describe is not normal, for any is version. You have some 
process mid behaving.


OK, that is far too many typos, even for me...

"have you tried running activity monitor to see what process is running, 
 if there is one ? What you describe is not normal, for any OS version. 
You (probably) have some process mis-behaving."


falling that, have you tried cleaning out your mac book of dust bunnies 
etc. ? If you have never done it it is likely jam packed with dust and 
this can have a serious effect on the cooling system, causing the fans 
to run a lot more than then otherwise would.





On 10 Oct 2017, at 2:52 am, [ftp83plus]  wrote:

What MacBook is that? I have the MacBook5,2 maxed out with 8GB RAM, currently 
on 10.11.6, and it’s a pain. The fan is always at maximum speed, even though 
CPU usage isn’t that high. Very tiring to work on.

What Mac OS X version works well on this model, and would still be reasonably 
compatible with modern software?




El 8 oct 2017, a las 21:04, Dave Horsfall  escribió:

Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely to 
be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?

Thanks.

--
Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-10 Thread Chris Jones 

Have you running activity monitor to see what process is running, if there is 
one ? What you describe is not normal, for any is version. You have some 
process mid behaving.

> On 10 Oct 2017, at 2:52 am, [ftp83plus]  wrote:
> 
> What MacBook is that? I have the MacBook5,2 maxed out with 8GB RAM, currently 
> on 10.11.6, and it’s a pain. The fan is always at maximum speed, even though 
> CPU usage isn’t that high. Very tiring to work on.
> 
> What Mac OS X version works well on this model, and would still be reasonably 
> compatible with modern software?
> 
> 
> 
>> El 8 oct 2017, a las 21:04, Dave Horsfall  escribió:
>> 
>> Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely 
>> to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
>> 
>> Thanks.
>> 
>> -- 
>> Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will 
>> suffer."
>

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-09 Thread [ftp83plus] 
Are you sure about your model number? MacBook10,1 is a Retina, 2017 model. Not 
exactly “old”.



> El 9 oct 2017, a las 9:11, Mark Anderson  escribió:
> 
> My old MacBook 10,1 with 16GB runs faster, it seems to be following the 
> speedup of versions 10.6, 10.8, and 10.11
> 
> —Mark
> ___
> Mark E. Anderson mailto:e...@emer.net>>
> 
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:24 PM, Arno Hautala  > wrote:
> I can't speak to slowness on your machine, but I haven't seen a
> noticeable difference on my own (Mid-2013 MacBook 8GB).
> MacPorts is running well and only a handful of ports are having
> issues. I think not everything is available as a binary yet, but
> progress continues.
> 
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Dave Horsfall  > wrote:
> > Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely
> > to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will
> > suffer."
> 
> 
> 
> --
> arno  s  hautala/-|   a...@alum.wpi.edu 
> 
> pgp b2c9d448
>

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-09 Thread [ftp83plus] 
What MacBook is that? I have the MacBook5,2 maxed out with 8GB RAM, currently 
on 10.11.6, and it’s a pain. The fan is always at maximum speed, even though 
CPU usage isn’t that high. Very tiring to work on.

What Mac OS X version works well on this model, and would still be reasonably 
compatible with modern software?



> El 8 oct 2017, a las 21:04, Dave Horsfall  escribió:
> 
> Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely to 
> be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
> 
> Thanks.
> 
> -- 
> Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will suffer."

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-09 Thread Mark Anderson 
My old MacBook 10,1 with 16GB runs faster, it seems to be following the
speedup of versions 10.6, 10.8, and 10.11

—Mark
___
Mark E. Anderson 

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:24 PM, Arno Hautala  wrote:

> I can't speak to slowness on your machine, but I haven't seen a
> noticeable difference on my own (Mid-2013 MacBook 8GB).
> MacPorts is running well and only a handful of ports are having
> issues. I think not everything is available as a binary yet, but
> progress continues.
>
> On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Dave Horsfall  wrote:
> > Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it
> likely
> > to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
> >
> > Thanks.
> >
> > --
> > Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will
> > suffer."
>
>
>
> --
> arno  s  hautala/-|   a...@alum.wpi.edu
>
> pgp b2c9d448
>

Re: High Sierra and MacPorts

2017-10-08 Thread Arno Hautala 
I can't speak to slowness on your machine, but I haven't seen a
noticeable difference on my own (Mid-2013 MacBook 8GB).
MacPorts is running well and only a handful of ports are having
issues. I think not everything is available as a binary yet, but
progress continues.

On Sun, Oct 8, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Dave Horsfall  wrote:
> Now that MacPorts is on 2.4.2, is High Sierra now fair game?  Is it likely
> to be even more bloated and slower on my old 4GB MacBook than before?
>
> Thanks.
>
> --
> Dave Horsfall DTM (VK2KFU)  "Those who don't understand security will
> suffer."



-- 
arno  s  hautala/-|   a...@alum.wpi.edu

pgp b2c9d448