Chris Wedgwood wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:17:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> You have to realize that stability takes precedence over
> EVERYTHING.
>
> Are you sure his desciption describes only disk-slow down? Seems to
> me something else is going on... why would
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Mark Hahn wrote:
> > Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
> > same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
> > 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
>
> this is known: Linus decreed
On 29 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
>
> You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING.
>
> Linus
>
At least with Linux, if something is *slow*, it generally works *perfect*
or damn near close to it. I'll take that; over Microsoft's being slow AND
buggy
On 29 Jan 2001, Linus Torvalds wrote:
You have to realize that stability takes precedence over EVERYTHING.
Linus
At least with Linux, if something is *slow*, it generally works *perfect*
or damn near close to it. I'll take that; over Microsoft's being slow AND
buggy AND
On Mon, 29 Jan 2001, Mark Hahn wrote:
Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
this is known: Linus decreed that,
Chris Wedgwood wrote:
On Mon, Jan 29, 2001 at 11:17:58PM -0800, Linus Torvalds wrote:
You have to realize that stability takes precedence over
EVERYTHING.
Are you sure his desciption describes only disk-slow down? Seems to
me something else is going on... why would speaker
In article <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Mark Hahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
>> same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
>> 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
>
ginal Message-
> From: David Riley [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Monday, January 29, 2001 5:59 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: *massive* slowdowns on 2.4.1-pre1[1|2]
>
>
> Sorry if this is a redundant post, but I didn't see any related posts
> (at least from th
> Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
> same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
> 900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported
disk corruption
Sorry if this is a redundant post, but I didn't see any related posts
(at least from the subject lines)...
Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is
Sorry if this is a redundant post, but I didn't see any related posts
(at least from the subject lines)...
Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is
Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
this is known: Linus decreed that, since two people reported
disk corruption on
In article [EMAIL PROTECTED],
Mark Hahn [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kernel 2.4.1-pre11 and pre12 are both massively slower than 2.4.0 on the
same machine, compiled with the same options. The machine is a Athlon
900 on a KT133 chipset. The slowdown is noticealbe in all areas...
this is known:
13 matches
Mail list logo
