Re: VIA 686 vs cdrecord = slow!

2002-03-07 Thread Joerg Schilling
From: Nate Bargmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] During the past week I've updated to a new system that features an Athlon 1.33G processor and the VIA chipset. I did a direct copy of my Linux partitions from the HD of the old machine to the HD of this machine. On the old machine I had no problems

Re: VIA 686 vs cdrecord = slow!

2002-03-07 Thread Len Sorensen
On Wed, Mar 06, 2002 at 10:43:33PM -0600, Nate Bargmann wrote: Hello! During the past week I've updated to a new system that features an Athlon 1.33G processor and the VIA chipset. I did a direct copy of my Linux partitions from the HD of the old machine to the HD of this machine. On the

Re: VIA 686 vs cdrecord = slow!

2002-03-07 Thread Nate Bargmann
* Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002 Mar 07 06:08 -0600]: A buffer underrun! Yup! Right on the money. A bit of research and I was able to turn my measly 1.9 MB/S throughput into 30.77 MB/S. Read README.ATAPI. I about gave up on it until I reached the very end where buffer underruns

Re: VIA 686 vs cdrecord = slow!

2002-03-07 Thread Nate Bargmann
* Bill Davidsen [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2002 Mar 07 16:27 -0600]: I shudder to think that you really did a direct copy from one machine and are running the same kernel on a new machine with a different architecture. Try building a 2.4.17 or 2.4.19-pre2-ac2 kernel for this and see if the