--I've had good results speedwise with JFS filesystems, even after a crash. I'm a reiserfs fan for the small file tail-packing feature (makes it good for root filesystem and Squid cache) but speedwise, JFS is much better - especially for Writes.
--For a drop-in vmware solution, I'd recommend Ubuntu. Vmware has precompiled kernel modules for it; and it's debian-derived, which means all the apt-get goodness.
> As for your other examples, let's see you run the latest release of KDE with all the bells and whistles on a Pentium 90. Not gonna happen, not even close
--Dude, **nobody's** using Pentium 90's anymore. P166 is the *absolute minimum* I'd recommend to anybody -- and even that's pushing the outer limits of usability, unless you're a tweakerfreak like me.
--For basic desktop usage, nowadays you need at least 300-500 MHz, 128+ MB RAM, (Win2k Pro and/or Linux), + fast HDs. Anything less, you might as well use DOS or Win95/98.
> (an 18 gig 15k rpm scsi will only cost you $40, and you'll get 3-4ms access times. A 36 gig will run you a little over $80.)
--Speaking as a friend of a friend, do you have $link / good source for buying these SCSI drives? I'm looking to rebuild a low-end server that has a bunch of 4GB LVD's in the front. TIA
Qemu does sound interesting. But the last time I tried it (admittedly months ago) it crashed while running a Knoppix Livecd that ran fine in Vmware. Has the stability of Qemu improved? (Honestly curious; I'm a VMware fan but have just downloaded Parallels and intend to eval it.)
> And talk about a patching nightmare! A virtualisation solution running on Windows with, say 5 instances of Windows. That's 6 copies of patches to apply, resulting in at least 11 reboots...
--This is why serious virtualization servers don't get run on Windoze. It's fine if you need to run Windows GUESTS - use a caching proxy server like Squid to download the patches, and stagger the automatic-update times for when they automatically reboot.
Thanks. All of those are n/a, I checked. It's just slow, and I've tweaked it to disable stuff that doesn't need to be running.
Right now, the things that seem to take the most time are auto-hardware detection, USB and hotplug stuff. Thisbox has no wireless.
Still, I know there are things that could be running in parallel. M$ did make an effort with XP to speed up the boot process; I'd really like to see *every* Linux distro do the same, as a best-practices issue. Linux should be able to boot *faster* on the same hardware, since it's not even loading a GUI.
> I have been an on/off user for the last year or two because it doesn't handle built-in video memory on my laptops well at all. Or I should say Linux in general doesn't. Ubuntu is the only one that would load in 1024x768 but it didn't function correctly and Intel is no help when it comes to Linux video support.
--Have you tried passing a kernel parm at boot: like ' vga=791 ' for 1024x768 framebuffer mode?
===
$ cat vgamodes-for-knoppix.txt Here is a vga= list:
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x64k vga = 791
# Normal VGA console # vga = normal
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x64k # vga=791
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x32k # vga=790
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x256 # vga=773
# VESA framebuffer console @ 800x600x64k # vga=788
# VESA framebuffer console @ 800x600x32k # vga=787
# VESA framebuffer console @ 800x600x256 # vga=771
# VESA framebuffer console @ 640x480x64k # vga=785
# VESA framebuffer console @ 640x480x32k # vga=784
# VESA framebuffer console @ 640x480x256 # vga=769
IMHO, the *biggest* thing Ubuntu needs to work on, is BOOT SPEED. Bust out the parallel-INIT that we've been needing for YEARS.
On a 750MHz laptop with 384MB of Ram, it takes *several* minutes to boot into console (non-X) mode. XP takes 2 minutes on the same machine. Not a troll, I use Linux for 90% of my day-day work. But since XP boots faster, I end up booting that instead, if all I'm going to be doing is light work/Web browsing.
Reiserfs is good for lots of small files, due to its default "tail" behavior. There is a slight speed boost if you use the "notail" mount option - but then you lose the small-file packing.
Go for Win2K Pro unless the machines are truly low-end, or you need $functionality that 2K doesn't have. Win2k runs acceptably on my old P166 laptop with 128MB of RAM, with a bit of trimming and disabling services.
I used to like Win98se, but now consider anything before Win2k to be a toy OS.
--The original Wing Commander (on floppies no less) pretty much amazed me, running in DOS on a 286 with 640K + 384K of extended Ram. That game was awesome.
Slashdot Mirror
--I've had good results speedwise with JFS filesystems, even after a crash. I'm a reiserfs fan for the small file tail-packing feature (makes it good for root filesystem and Squid cache) but speedwise, JFS is much better - especially for Writes.
--For a drop-in vmware solution, I'd recommend Ubuntu. Vmware has precompiled kernel modules for it; and it's debian-derived, which means all the apt-get goodness.
Somebody set up us the bomb !! :b
--Use ' mc ' to delete files, or write an equivalent to " deltree ".
;-) so no help there. Just be careful typing while root!!
--As for the dd, I've done that meself
> As for your other examples, let's see you run the latest release of KDE with all the bells and whistles on a Pentium 90. Not gonna happen, not even close
--Dude, **nobody's** using Pentium 90's anymore. P166 is the *absolute minimum* I'd recommend to anybody -- and even that's pushing the outer limits of usability, unless you're a tweakerfreak like me.
--For basic desktop usage, nowadays you need at least 300-500 MHz, 128+ MB RAM, (Win2k Pro and/or Linux), + fast HDs. Anything less, you might as well use DOS or Win95/98.
In Soviet Russia, Steven Seagal could do it with an Apple Newton -- while CHUCK NORRIS was pouring HOT GRITS on a Petrified Natalie Portman!!
:b
Parent +1 interesting link
--Thanks for that; interesting story. Good on him for ditching MS after they treated him like that.
> (an 18 gig 15k rpm scsi will only cost you $40, and you'll get 3-4ms access times. A 36 gig will run you a little over $80.)
--Speaking as a friend of a friend, do you have $link / good source for buying these SCSI drives? I'm looking to rebuild a low-end server that has a bunch of 4GB LVD's in the front. TIA
Please clarify, what is Hercules // got $link?
;-)
It would be a lot easier to learn programming on mainframes if companies started giving out ssh accounts to VM environments.
--The funny thing is, I know exactly what you said. :)
--As long as they dump TSO like a bad habit, and implement VM/CMS with decent REXX throughput, I'd do it...
ANNOUNCER: Yes, Log. All nations have Log. So, hurry now to your local
store and be the first in your country to have the International Log.
What rolls down stairs
Alone or in pairs...
Rolls over your neighbor's dog?
What's great for a snack
And fits on your back?
It's Log! Log! Log!
It's Lo-og, it's Lo-og
It's big, it's heavy
It's wood!
It's Lo-og, Lo-og
It's better than bad
It's good!!!
Everyone needs a log
Everyone wants a log
You're gonna love it
Log
MR. HORSE: Yes sir, I like it!
http://www.lyricsandsongs.com/song/416794.html
> It doesn't take much to hit the up arrow, Ctrl-A, type 'sudo ' and then hit enter
:b
--Doing that while running the " screen " program is not recommended, and may cause unpredictable results.
Qemu does sound interesting. But the last time I tried it (admittedly months ago) it crashed while running a Knoppix Livecd that ran fine in Vmware. Has the stability of Qemu improved? (Honestly curious; I'm a VMware fan but have just downloaded Parallels and intend to eval it.)
> And talk about a patching nightmare! A virtualisation solution running on Windows with, say 5 instances of Windows. That's 6 copies of patches to apply, resulting in at least 11 reboots...
--This is why serious virtualization servers don't get run on Windoze. It's fine if you need to run Windows GUESTS - use a caching proxy server like Squid to download the patches, and stagger the automatic-update times for when they automatically reboot.
Thanks. All of those are n/a, I checked. It's just slow, and I've tweaked it to disable stuff that doesn't need to be running.
Right now, the things that seem to take the most time are auto-hardware detection, USB and hotplug stuff. Thisbox has no wireless.
Still, I know there are things that could be running in parallel. M$ did make an effort with XP to speed up the boot process; I'd really like to see *every* Linux distro do the same, as a best-practices issue. Linux should be able to boot *faster* on the same hardware, since it's not even loading a GUI.
> I have been an on/off user for the last year or two because it doesn't handle built-in video memory on my laptops well at all. Or I should say Linux in general doesn't. Ubuntu is the only one that would load in 1024x768 but it didn't function correctly and Intel is no help when it comes to Linux video support.
--Have you tried passing a kernel parm at boot: like ' vga=791 ' for 1024x768 framebuffer mode?
===
$ cat vgamodes-for-knoppix.txt
Here is a vga= list:
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x64k
vga = 791
# Normal VGA console
# vga = normal
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x64k
# vga=791
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x32k
# vga=790
# VESA framebuffer console @ 1024x768x256
# vga=773
# VESA framebuffer console @ 800x600x64k
# vga=788
# VESA framebuffer console @ 800x600x32k
# vga=787
# VESA framebuffer console @ 800x600x256
# vga=771
# VESA framebuffer console @ 640x480x64k
# vga=785
# VESA framebuffer console @ 640x480x32k
# vga=784
# VESA framebuffer console @ 640x480x256
# vga=769
--Courtesy of Monkeyman
IMHO, the *biggest* thing Ubuntu needs to work on, is BOOT SPEED. Bust out the parallel-INIT that we've been needing for YEARS.
On a 750MHz laptop with 384MB of Ram, it takes *several* minutes to boot into console (non-X) mode. XP takes 2 minutes on the same machine. Not a troll, I use Linux for 90% of my day-day work. But since XP boots faster, I end up booting that instead, if all I'm going to be doing is light work/Web browsing.
Could you please provide some links that you commonly use? TIA
Hmm... I guess Winders ain't backward-compatible with vacuum tubes... ;-)
"Tales of Pirx the Pilot" is also a good read.
Reiserfs is good for lots of small files, due to its default "tail" behavior. There is a slight speed boost if you use the "notail" mount option - but then you lose the small-file packing.
REXX is also IMHO a good alternative, especially to Basic. ;-)
And it's now available for Linux.
Go for Win2K Pro unless the machines are truly low-end, or you need $functionality that 2K doesn't have. Win2k runs acceptably on my old P166 laptop with 128MB of RAM, with a bit of trimming and disabling services.
I used to like Win98se, but now consider anything before Win2k to be a toy OS.
Make sure you are using the blowfish encryption algorithm for fastest transfer speeds...
( Sing along, kids! )
We all live in a yellow submarine,
Ubuntu submarine,
We think it's pretty keen...
We all live in a yellow submarine,
Yellow submarine,
etc.
--The original Wing Commander (on floppies no less) pretty much amazed me, running in DOS on a 286 with 640K + 384K of extended Ram. That game was awesome.