On Fri, 2004-02-13 at 00:10, Collins Richey wrote: > > Unfortunately, I've been running 2.5/2.6 too long now to remember 2.4 > results all that well, but I can certainly echo your description of the > compile process. I'm running an 'emerge -e system' to a clone of my > system in a chroot right now. Idle time is consistently near 0%, but I > scarcely notice that when reading email or browsing in another window.
Same here.. I was compiling a new kernel earlier this morning (checking out love-sources-2.6.3-rc2), while doing emerge -uD world, while listening to mp3s, etc w/o even noticing that anything was compiling. > > One of the things to keep in mind is that any system runs better with > more memory. This machine is faster (P4 2.4 Gz) than my other (AthlonXP > 1800+), but I have just under 256MB memory available, so I don't get > quite as good results as on the Athlon (512MB). That machine (also a > 2.6 system) positively screams through compiles. > > I would be curious to know the memory size of the machines whose owners > are singing the praises of, or conversely complaining about, 2.6. Running an Athlon XP 2100 (1.8GHz) w/768MB of RAM Aaron -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
