On Tue, 31 Oct 2006 23:25:46 -0500
Anthony DeRobertis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > How come it never outputs p4_clockmod? I use that happily on several
> > different machines.
> >
>
> I can confirm I've tried it on a machine. The performance impact was
> substantial
On Tue, 31 Oct 2006, Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Peter Palfrader wrote:
> > How come it never outputs p4_clockmod? I use that happily on several
> > different machines.
> >
>
> I can confirm I've tried it on a machine. The performance impact was
> substantial (at least if I allowed it to go t
Anthony DeRobertis wrote:
> Peter Palfrader wrote:
>
>> How come it never outputs p4_clockmod? I use that happily on several
>> different machines.
>>
>>
>
> I can confirm I've tried it on a machine. The performance impact was
> substantial (at least if I allowed it to go to its lowest
Peter Palfrader wrote:
> How come it never outputs p4_clockmod? I use that happily on several
> different machines.
>
I can confirm I've tried it on a machine. The performance impact was
substantial (at least if I allowed it to go to its lowest speed); the
power consumption difference was imme
Peter Palfrader:
> How come it never outputs p4_clockmod? I use that happily on several
> different machines.
It's disabled in Ubuntu with the following comment:
# Disabled for now - the latency tends to be bad enough to make it
# fairly pointless.
# echo "FREQDRIVER=p4-clockmod" >/etc/default/p
On Mon, 30 Oct 2006, Per Olofsson wrote:
> Chris Hanson:
> > Probably yes, but I'd like to see it before I decide.
>
> Attached. I will probably change a few things though, it should
> probably by default try to load the module instead of merely
> outputting it.
How come it never outputs p4_cloc
Chris Hanson:
> Probably yes, but I'd like to see it before I decide.
Attached. I will probably change a few things though, it should
probably by default try to load the module instead of merely
outputting it.
> Does this have to make it into etch?
Nope. Although it would be nice, of course.
--
Per Olofsson wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Marco d'Itri:
>> On Oct 30, Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>>> Why do you want to make a separate package for such a tiny shell script?
>>> The overhead is just two much.
>>> I'd propose to include it into the powermgmt-base package.
>> I fully agree, it'
Michael Biebl:
> one more comment:
>
> The shell script contains a bashism ("==") at line 95, which is not
> posix compliant. Use a simple "=" instead.
Thanks. There were many bashisms in the original script from Ubuntu,
and I apparently missed this one.
--
Pelle
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to
Per Olofsson wrote:
> Package: wnpp
> Severity: wishlist
> Owner: Per Olofsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> * Package name: cpufreq-detect
> Version : 0.1
> Upstream Author : Per Olofsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> * License : GPL
> Programming Lang: shell
> Description : det
Hi,
Marco d'Itri:
> On Oct 30, Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Why do you want to make a separate package for such a tiny shell script?
> > The overhead is just two much.
> > I'd propose to include it into the powermgmt-base package.
> I fully agree, it's silly to create a package
On Oct 30, Michael Biebl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why do you want to make a separate package for such a tiny shell script?
> The overhead is just two much.
> I'd propose to include it into the powermgmt-base package.
I fully agree, it's silly to create a package for a 2 KB shell script.
--
c
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Per Olofsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* Package name: cpufreq-detect
Version : 0.1
Upstream Author : Per Olofsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* License : GPL
Programming Lang: shell
Description : detect CPU frequency control driver
This
13 matches
Mail list logo
