On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 05:08, Andrew Humphries wrote:
> On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 13:51, C. Ulrich wrote:
> > On Sat, 2003-10-25 at 00:43, andi payn wrote:
> > > 4. While running a similar set of services, FreeBSD may be using less
> > > background processing time. Or maybe not. I definitely see signifi
On Mon, 2003-10-27 at 13:51, C. Ulrich wrote:
> On Sat, 2003-10-25 at 00:43, andi payn wrote:
> > 4. While running a similar set of services, FreeBSD may be using less
> > background processing time. Or maybe not. I definitely see significantly
> > lower CPU usage (idling under X, FreeBSD shows ab
On Sat, 2003-10-25 at 00:43, andi payn wrote:
> 4. While running a similar set of services, FreeBSD may be using less
> background processing time. Or maybe not. I definitely see significantly
> lower CPU usage (idling under X, FreeBSD shows about 2-10% CPU, linux
> about 15-35%). However, this may
On Fri, 2003-10-24 at 14:44, Alessio Caffi wrote:
> dear FreeBSD team:
> I am a new user to both Linux and FreeBSD. I installed
> both system (4.8 and slackware 9) under VMware for
> windows they are working ok.
> Before parting my HD and do a real installation ,
> without VMware emulator. I am int
dear FreeBSD team:
I am a new user to both Linux and FreeBSD. I installed
both system (4.8 and slackware 9) under VMware for
windows they are working ok.
Before parting my HD and do a real installation ,
without VMware emulator. I am interested to know which
of one runs faster. What about Linux pro
