Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 15:44, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:21:43PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote: > > Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until > > I can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133. Also, I get an error > > when trying to chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix. It says something about no > > such directory. I added the hack to the xfree86-common initscript. Could > > this be a problem? Should I add it to bootmisc.sh as stated earlier? > > TIA!! > > Well, you'll have to mkdir it, first. Do you think that /etc/init.d/xfree86-common should create this? It shouldn't be THAT difficult to have /etc/init.d/xfree86-common look for configuration files specifying which directories to create etc. -- http://www.coker.com.au/selinux/ My NSA Security Enhanced Linux packages http://www.coker.com.au/bonnie++/ Bonnie++ hard drive benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/postal/Postal SMTP/POP benchmark http://www.coker.com.au/~russell/ My home page
Re: Kmail problems with signed attachments
Hmm... I [resume you're aware the ^M characters are actually DOS/Windows carriage returns? ie CRLF, rather than the unix convention of just LF.. David 'On Wednesday 09 April 2003 23:01, Mika Fischer wrote: > Hi! > > [Keeping this on the list because it has something to do with kmail :)] > > So back to my probblem from the "kmail & cryptplug anyone?" thread... > > I ran several tests and this is what I found out: > > 1. The behaviour is different between using the MTA via SMTP or via > /usr/lib/sendmail. I couldn't think of an easy test for the SMTP case > but I figured out what goes on when using /usr/lib/sendmail by > replacing it with a script that logs the message to a file. (So 2. > applies only to /usr/lib/sendmail-mode) > 2. the diff between what kmail stores and kmail sends (!) is: > --- > --- kmail-1-original2003-04-09 23:27:27.0 +0200 > +++ kmail-2-sent-to-mta 2003-04-09 23:27:13.0 +0200 > @@ -11,40 +11,35 @@ >charset="us-ascii" > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > -Status: RO > -X-Status: S > -X-KMail-EncryptionState: N > -X-KMail-SignatureState: N > > > --Boundary-03=_hAJl+awMqMT+u63 > -Content-Type: multipart/mixed; > - boundary="Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd" > -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -Content-Description: signed data > -Content-Disposition: inline > - > - > ---Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd > -Content-Type: text/plain; > - charset="us-ascii" > -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -Content-Description: body text > -Content-Disposition: inline > - > -This is a test-mail. > - > ---Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd > -Content-Type: text/plain; > - charset="us-ascii"; > - name="test-attachment" > -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > -Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="test-attachment" > - > -This is a test-attachment. > - > - > ---Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd-- > +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; > + boundary="Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd" > +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > +Content-Description: signed data > +Content-Disposition: inline > + > +--Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd > +Content-Type: text/plain; > + charset="us-ascii" > +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > +Content-Description: body text > +Content-Disposition: inline > + > +This is a test-mail. > + > +--Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd > +Content-Type: text/plain; > + charset="us-ascii"; > + name="test-attachment" > +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit > +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="test-attachment" > + > +This is a test-attachment. > + > + > +--Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd-- > > --Boundary-03=_hAJl+awMqMT+u63 > Content-Type: application/pgp-signature > --- > > The reason for all the seamingly identical lines is that the original > has a "^M" character at the end of the line. > So with the "^M"s the signature is correct, without it it's not. > Interestingly the "^M"s appear only in the "multipart/mixed" part of > the message (the part that is signed) and not in the rest... > > So that's the reason. I have really no idea why the hell kmail does this > but I'm going to file a bug tomorrow if noone has done so already. > > 3. As if this was not strange enough... here it comes :) > If I send the mail via SMTP to localhost something (after this I'm > really not sure if it is kmail *again*) adds an empty "Subject:" header > to every MIME-part. I've searched the RFCs but found nothing indicating > that such a header was mandatory. > So I'll probably file another bug about this one :) > > I'd be glad if anyone could check all this and get back to me on whether > or not it could be reproduced. > > Cheers, > Mika
Re: Kmail problems with signed attachments
Hi, David! On Thursday 10 April 2003 01:29, David Pye wrote: > I [resume you're aware the ^M characters are actually DOS/Windows > carriage returns? ie CRLF, rather than the unix convention of just > LF.. Yes, I know :) I just can't think of a reason why kmail would put them in there (only in the signed part) then sign the message and then remov them again befor sending the mail out :) It just doesn't make any sense... Cheers, Mika pgpfFBMg99ULE.pgp Description: signature
Re: Kmail problems with signed attachments
Hi! Small addition... On Thursday 10 April 2003 00:01, Mika Fischer wrote: > 1. The behaviour is different between using the MTA via SMTP or via > /usr/lib/sendmail. This is wrong. The behaviour is actually the same. > 3. As if this was not strange enough... here it comes :) > If I send the mail via SMTP to localhost something (after this I'm > really not sure if it is kmail *again*) adds an empty "Subject:" > header to every MIME-part. I've searched the RFCs but found nothing > indicating that such a header was mandatory. > So I'll probably file another bug about this one :) This is really kmail. When first displaying the message it adds those headers itself which is totally crazy :) So, filing two bugs tomorrow :) Cheers, Mika pgpeZnzxxe1oM.pgp Description: signature
Kmail problems with signed attachments
Hi! [Keeping this on the list because it has something to do with kmail :)] So back to my probblem from the "kmail & cryptplug anyone?" thread... I ran several tests and this is what I found out: 1. The behaviour is different between using the MTA via SMTP or via /usr/lib/sendmail. I couldn't think of an easy test for the SMTP case but I figured out what goes on when using /usr/lib/sendmail by replacing it with a script that logs the message to a file. (So 2. applies only to /usr/lib/sendmail-mode) 2. the diff between what kmail stores and kmail sends (!) is: --- --- kmail-1-original2003-04-09 23:27:27.0 +0200 +++ kmail-2-sent-to-mta 2003-04-09 23:27:13.0 +0200 @@ -11,40 +11,35 @@ charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -Status: RO -X-Status: S -X-KMail-EncryptionState: N -X-KMail-SignatureState: N --Boundary-03=_hAJl+awMqMT+u63 -Content-Type: multipart/mixed; - boundary="Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd" -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -Content-Description: signed data -Content-Disposition: inline - - ---Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd -Content-Type: text/plain; - charset="us-ascii" -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -Content-Description: body text -Content-Disposition: inline - -This is a test-mail. - ---Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd -Content-Type: text/plain; - charset="us-ascii"; - name="test-attachment" -Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="test-attachment" - -This is a test-attachment. - - ---Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd-- +Content-Type: multipart/mixed; + boundary="Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Description: signed data +Content-Disposition: inline + +--Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Description: body text +Content-Disposition: inline + +This is a test-mail. + +--Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd +Content-Type: text/plain; + charset="us-ascii"; + name="test-attachment" +Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit +Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="test-attachment" + +This is a test-attachment. + + +--Boundary-01=_hAJl+ZOWvqRjtRd-- --Boundary-03=_hAJl+awMqMT+u63 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature --- The reason for all the seamingly identical lines is that the original has a "^M" character at the end of the line. So with the "^M"s the signature is correct, without it it's not. Interestingly the "^M"s appear only in the "multipart/mixed" part of the message (the part that is signed) and not in the rest... So that's the reason. I have really no idea why the hell kmail does this but I'm going to file a bug tomorrow if noone has done so already. 3. As if this was not strange enough... here it comes :) If I send the mail via SMTP to localhost something (after this I'm really not sure if it is kmail *again*) adds an empty "Subject:" header to every MIME-part. I've searched the RFCs but found nothing indicating that such a header was mandatory. So I'll probably file another bug about this one :) I'd be glad if anyone could check all this and get back to me on whether or not it could be reproduced. Cheers, Mika pgp7KjrBRPkEL.pgp Description: signature
Re: Compiling for i686
>> As far as I can tell, compiling just KDE for i686 will provide a barely >> noticeable speed increase. This is because KDE spends a large amount of > >A bit off topic but changing from 2.95 to gcc 3.2 has reduced cpu usage in >many applications on my system by as much as 30%. Particular noticable is the >change in mplayer which is now much less cpu hungry. > This is because gcc 3.2 has made major improvements it optimizing code for i686 type cpu's, including the Athelon, AMD ond other clones. Also, mplayer is extremely good at picking up what processor is available and setting optimizations well. I forgot to copy my last message to this list, so I'll add my warnings here. It was suggested to re-compile glibc and others before expecting any type of improvements. For glibc, this is dangerous advice for many reasons: 1) glibc makes extensive use of the kernel headers in /usr/src/linux. It is vitally important that the headers here are the same ones that glibc are compiled against, otherwise you will have serious problems. 2) glibc will autodetect your system and set it's optimizations accordingly. Any attempt to increase these optimization setting, like export CFLAGS and such is likely to result in an unstable glibc. Not good! 3) If you are using a Debian system, you are better off leaving well enough alone. If you wish to improve your system with compiler optimizations, you should start reading up on Linux From Scratch. Other suggestions included XFree86. Building XFree86 is not difficult, but a home-built XFree86 does not comply with the Debian version. So be careful. However, there are quite a few optimizations that can be set when compiling XFree86 that can make major differences in speed. Again, if you really like Debian, I'd keep clear, unless you are good at creating your own .deb's. Cheers, John Gay
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 02:41 pm, Gaute Hvoslef Kvalnes wrote: > Sun didn't create StarOffice, they bought it from Star Division (a > German company, I think), who developed it until version 5.2. Since > then, it has really been made faster, but there's still a long way to > go. If you compare it to the upcoming MS Office 11, it doesn't look > too bad at all. And I keep getting confused -- did Star somehow acquire the old Wordstar? And incorporated parts of it in Star Office? Randy Kramer
Re: Compiling for i686
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 19:27, Sean Fraley wrote: > > Does anyone know if compiling for i686 instead of for i386 would give any > > speed increase greater than very marginal? > > Any real-life tests anywhere? > > As far as I can tell, compiling just KDE for i686 will provide a barely > noticeable speed increase. This is because KDE spends a large amount of A bit off topic but changing from 2.95 to gcc 3.2 has reduced cpu usage in many applications on my system by as much as 30%. Particular noticable is the change in mplayer which is now much less cpu hungry. Anders -- This email was generated using KMail from KDE 3.1 on Debian GNU/Linux
Re: kmail cc and bcc not working
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 18:06:06 +0200 Børre Gaup <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: [...] > > Marc > Can it be some virus cleaning program at the ISP that's causing this > behaviour? > Hello Børre I also had the idea that sth. is wrong with that ISP's SMTP, but then I tried to send from my machine using kmail, and it worked fine. So I guess sth. is messed up locally... We'll check this again later this week, and I am going to report then. Thanks for your reply Marc pgpjkqwScH09K.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
Aryan Ameri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > There was a time, when Sun was known for producing fast, secure and > stable code. e.g back in mid 90s, everyone (even their competitors) > agreed that Solaris was the best *nix ever. When in 2000 they > announced their plan for staroffice/openoffice.Borg I really > expected something much better than this bloated piece of ash** > > It makes me wonder, what happened to that sun? Sun didn't create StarOffice, they bought it from Star Division (a German company, I think), who developed it until version 5.2. Since then, it has really been made faster, but there's still a long way to go. If you compare it to the upcoming MS Office 11, it doesn't look too bad at all. Regards, Gaute Hvoslef Kvalnes
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 18:19, Hendrik Sattler wrote: > I read that but it does not explain why the other method is 3-4 times (!) > slower. Especially, because the sockets in /tmp/.ICE-unix are owned by me! > So there must be an if-then-else code somewhere that causes this behaviour. > I'm not so familiar with sockets but isn't a normal user also able to > create sockets like the needed ones? If yes, this behaviour is a bug in X. Hm, I guess there must be a reason for this? -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 16:46, Aryan Ameri wrote: > > Yes... bad design, bloat, redundant code, all the horrors in one... > > We use it at home because of the good support for MS office formats > > though. > > Yup, actually OOo is the worst software, which I *have* to use everyday. > Only for that MS file format support thing. Ironic... > You know funny thing is, instead of tuning it to start faster, in 1.1 > beta, they have added a status bar, so that when OOo is starting, you > will know how many minutes you have, to go and get a coffee and come > back ;-) D'oh. > There was a time, when Sun was known for producing fast, secure and > stable code. e.g back in mid 90s, everyone (even their competitors) > agreed that Solaris was the best *nix ever. When in 2000 they announced > their plan for staroffice/openoffice.Borg I really expected something > much better than this bloated piece of ash** > > It makes me wonder, what happened to that sun? They're still making one of the best unices around, if it weren't for the fact that we now have Linux, and Debian, and a few other opensource unices ;) Seriously, for a desktop I don't think there is a point in choosing Solaris over Linux; for a nfs server or something that has 32 cpu's maybe you should consider Solaris :) > just my $0.02 > > -- > /* My name is Jehovah. I have a special plan to save the universe, but > because of heavenly security reasons I can't tell you what that plan > is. Your's just going to put your faith in me, because I see the > picture and you don't. You know I'm good, because I told you so. If you > don't believe me, I'll throw you on my enemies list and throw you in a > pit where Infernal Revenue Service will audit your taxes for eternity*/ > --RMS Lol... How serious is this meant? :-) -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: Compiling for i686
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 02:58 am, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > Does anyone know if compiling for i686 instead of for i386 would give any > speed increase greater than very marginal? > Any real-life tests anywhere? As far as I can tell, compiling just KDE for i686 will provide a barely noticeable speed increase. This is because KDE spends a large amount of time calling functions from other libraries, which aren't optimized for a given architecture. I would suggest also re-compiling at minimum glibc, libstdc++, xfree86, and qt for i686 also. In addition, if you don't do any software development yourself, you might consider making sure that no debugging symbols are compiled in.
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 07:44 schrieb Daniel Stone: > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:21:43PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote: > > Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until > > I can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133. Also, I get an error > > when trying to chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix. It says something about no > > such directory. I added the hack to the xfree86-common initscript. Could > > this be a problem? Should I add it to bootmisc.sh as stated earlier? > > TIA!! > > Well, you'll have to mkdir it, first. More exactly: mkdir -p -m 1777 /tmp/.ICE-unix To not fiddle with file that migh get updated, put those commands into /etc/init.d/ICE-unix.sh and link /etc/rcS.d/S56ICE-unix.sh to that. This way, it will never get overwritten by an update. HS - -- Mein GPG-Key ist auf meiner Homepage verfügbar: http://www.hendrik-sattler.de oder über pgp.net PingoS - Linux-User helfen Schulen: http://www.pingos.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+lErNzvr6q9zCwcERAs8RAKCAa4flXMH9Z2lcEoGiyFJcjbOy9QCeMOJI g1Qc02sKya4SO9oeWHtITY8= =WWSE -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: Missing function Close Tab in Konqueror 3.1.1 from Ralf Nolden APT Repository
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 07:16 schrieb Terry Milnes: > Does anyone have the same problem? If so, how do I fix it? I simply edited the adress bar and added the three tab-specific icons (there are three) on the most right of it. This way, they are almost at the same place as in Mozilla :) Better would be behaviour like Mozilla but I can live with it. HS - -- Mein GPG-Key ist auf meiner Homepage verfügbar: http://www.hendrik-sattler.de oder über pgp.net PingoS - Linux-User helfen Schulen: http://www.pingos.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+lEuHzvr6q9zCwcERAlVvAKCcIr39vSroVowxEDfyYw23y7uH7gCeOnyw 6VC4ye60paCshdokycdsD8Y= =dyzg -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:03, Frank Van Damme wrote: > > It's pretty simple - there's even a HOWTO around. > Url? Could be: http://dforce.sh.cvut.cz/~seli/download/tips.html Cheers, Mika pgpvUidZtKby0.pgp Description: signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 03:34 schrieb Daniel Stone: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 03:11:31AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote: > > I just tried the > > chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix > > /etc/init.d/kdm restart > > and it really kicks it. Increadible but this this reduces the KDE startup > > time to 1/3. Maybe there are other tweaks. I will go on trying, maybe > > leaving away some ssh-agent helps. > > But looking at it: this makes absolutely no sense! I am the only user of > > this system and what-the-*#~# is going on here? > > Is this a bug in X or a bug in KDE? > > > > Even if some startup script fixes this permission, it still makes no > > sense to me. > > Well, as I said, it makes ICE use a faster IPC mechanism. I read that but it does not explain why the other method is 3-4 times (!) slower. Especially, because the sockets in /tmp/.ICE-unix are owned by me! So there must be an if-then-else code somewhere that causes this behaviour. I'm not so familiar with sockets but isn't a normal user also able to create sockets like the needed ones? If yes, this behaviour is a bug in X. HS - -- Mein GPG-Key ist auf meiner Homepage verfügbar: http://www.hendrik-sattler.de oder über pgp.net PingoS - Linux-User helfen Schulen: http://www.pingos.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+lEf4zvr6q9zCwcERAoCDAJ4n9z7x5X30VQbWkAKcuCV/FaMhMgCfS6GU iT640Uczp6MSpgHq8Xx3CXY= =YWNp -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 08:11 schrieb Matt Sheffield: > That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian > deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix > and all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time you > start your machine up from scratch. But once these things have been set up, > I've found that KDE will start up quite speedily. > > I don't like the slow first startup as I can't leave my system on all the > time. I'd like to disable /tmp clearing and clean things up myself. How > does one go about this? Which init scrip is it? With kernel 2.4.xx, you should probably use tmpfs for /tmp. May make it even faster but there will be surely nothing left after a reboot. For tmpfs, add the following line to /etc/fstab: none/tmp tmpfs defaults 0 0 HS - -- Mein GPG-Key ist auf meiner Homepage verfügbar: http://www.hendrik-sattler.de oder über pgp.net PingoS - Linux-User helfen Schulen: http://www.pingos.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+lEZ3zvr6q9zCwcERAkDCAKC9ZMPcmdMnTOpPLeEFW/AbsggRKACgmuc2 1XpzR+AB60aIQZ3qrGUCRsA= =FHEN -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: kmail cc and bcc not working
Gaskavahkku, cuoÅomÃnu 9. b. 2003 10.25, Marc Tinnemeyer don ÄÃllet: > On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 09:34:45 +0200 > > Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Works fine here. I guess it's probably some bad interaction between > > kmail and the outgoing mail transport. What outgoing mail transport > > are you using? If you use the local sendmail, you should have the log > > in /var/log/mail.log. > > Hello Adrian, > > The mail gets delivered directly to the SMTP at his ISP, so there are > no logs :-( > But we'll test it using exim or sth. else to figure it out. > > Thank's for your reply, > > Marc Can it be some virus cleaning program at the ISP that's causing this behaviour? BÃrre pgpDrwxGVkytp.pgp Description: signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 15:23, Frank Van Damme wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:26, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > OOo is also ridiculous. It should share nore with the other > > > available open source software - such as widgets. I'd be > > > delighted to save my files with those gorgeous QT dialogs instead > > > of the pathetic built-in windows ui clone they use now. I wonder > > > why Sun hasn't used Motif for the Staroffice UI actually. > > > > OOo is ridiculous in so many ways, including a 15min startup time > > on lower-end machines. It's the worst benchmark of anything you > > could possibly pick. > > Yes... bad design, bloat, redundant code, all the horrors in one... > We use it at home because of the good support for MS office formats > though. Yup, actually OOo is the worst software, which I *have* to use everyday. Only for that MS file format support thing. You know funny thing is, instead of tuning it to start faster, in 1.1 beta, they have added a status bar, so that when OOo is starting, you will know how many minutes you have, to go and get a coffee and come back ;-) There was a time, when Sun was known for producing fast, secure and stable code. e.g back in mid 90s, everyone (even their competitors) agreed that Solaris was the best *nix ever. When in 2000 they announced their plan for staroffice/openoffice.Borg I really expected something much better than this bloated piece of ash** It makes me wonder, what happened to that sun? just my $0.02 -- /* My name is Jehovah. I have a special plan to save the universe, but because of heavenly security reasons I can't tell you what that plan is. Your's just going to put your faith in me, because I see the picture and you don't. You know I'm good, because I told you so. If you don't believe me, I'll throw you on my enemies list and throw you in a pit where Infernal Revenue Service will audit your taxes for eternity*/ --RMS Aryan Ameri
Re: landscape PDF bug (was: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User)
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:19:28PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote: > I've seen this problem before a few times, too. It applies to any > landscape PDF file, and affects Ghostview as well as KGhostview and the > Konqueror PDF plugin too. > > In fact I bumped into it this afternoon looking at uni course notes; > so if anyone wants a test case: > http://wwwscience.murdoch.edu.au/teach/m114/TKMEnergy.pdf > And a screenshot: > http://cp.yi.org:81/~cameron/kghostview-sideways.jpg > > (Sid, KDE 3.1.1, ghostscript 7.06) > > Before I file a bug, perhaps someone could tell me whether it should be > against gs or kghostview? AFAIK, against gs. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpO2IOEz7Ltb.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: landscape PDF bug (was: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User)
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:23:07PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote: | > > KGhostview is still buggy. The first pdf my dad tried to open with it | > > showed up sideways, off course the rest of the page in place. Grmbl... | > | > Did you report a bug? :) | | IIRC, the data was confidential. I've seen this problem before a few times, too. It applies to any landscape PDF file, and affects Ghostview as well as KGhostview and the Konqueror PDF plugin too. In fact I bumped into it this afternoon looking at uni course notes; so if anyone wants a test case: http://wwwscience.murdoch.edu.au/teach/m114/TKMEnergy.pdf And a screenshot: http://cp.yi.org:81/~cameron/kghostview-sideways.jpg (Sid, KDE 3.1.1, ghostscript 7.06) Before I file a bug, perhaps someone could tell me whether it should be against gs or kghostview? Cameron.
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:23:07PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:26, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Well, I'm talking Australian dollars. There was a reason why I still had > > the PII when I *maintained* KDE. > > Ugh... Must be painful to compile c++ code on such a box. gcc2.95 was a lot better, but still, incredibly painful. > > OOo is ridiculous in so many ways, including a 15min startup time on > > lower-end machines. It's the worst benchmark of anything you could > > possibly pick. > > Yes... bad design, bloat, redundant code, all the horrors in one... We use it > at home because of the good support for MS office formats though. *nod*. KOffice does a pretty good job of imports these days, however. > > Did you report a bug? :) > > IIRC, the data was confidential. Oh, fair enough then. I actually haven't seen KGV screw up yet, which is a fair achievement. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpdnMQrfPtPM.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:21:06PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:31, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Um, I'm not a "hardware is so cheap today" guy. I've spent most of the > > thread pointing out why saying "hardware's cheap, go buy it" is a > > ridiculous assertion. > > Was still pointing at KL... Oh. Cool. > > Depends what you put there. I spent a lot of time tuning her machine to > > get it halfway to usable. > > I heard about a version of win98 "lite", that would come without IE. It would > even make a stab at stability :p Heh. IE 4.01sp2 is a little better than the rest. > > Well, you can, just try a few things: > > * .ICE-unix > > * disable klipper, kwrited and korgac > > Kde without Klipper? Hmmm... Some people who aren't used to it find it annoying, anyway. :) > > * generally disable stuff you don't use > > * schedule cron jobs for 4am > > :) Well, just common sense, right? -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpHTKv2ozObB.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:26, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 01:03:38PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote: > > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 11:56, Daniel Stone wrote: > > > Maybe in, say, DDR. > > > > 256 megs ddr = 80 euro. Reason my box has 256 meg :) I'll upgrade once I > > have a game that needs more for textures. > > Well, I'm talking Australian dollars. There was a reason why I still had > the PII when I *maintained* KDE. Ugh... Must be painful to compile c++ code on such a box. > > OOo is also ridiculous. It should share nore with the other available > > open source software - such as widgets. I'd be delighted to save my files > > with those gorgeous QT dialogs instead of the pathetic built-in windows > > ui clone they use now. I wonder why Sun hasn't used Motif for the > > Staroffice UI actually. > > OOo is ridiculous in so many ways, including a 15min startup time on > lower-end machines. It's the worst benchmark of anything you could > possibly pick. Yes... bad design, bloat, redundant code, all the horrors in one... We use it at home because of the good support for MS office formats though. > > > BTW, KGhostView posed no difficulties with huge PDFs, either. Not even > > > image-laden ones, on my laptop. > > > > KGhostview is still buggy. The first pdf my dad tried to open with it > > showed up sideways, off course the rest of the page in place. Grmbl... > > Did you report a bug? :) IIRC, the data was confidential. -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:31, Daniel Stone wrote: > Um, I'm not a "hardware is so cheap today" guy. I've spent most of the > thread pointing out why saying "hardware's cheap, go buy it" is a > ridiculous assertion. Was still pointing at KL... > > Yes I am talking about EDO ram of course! ever tried putting SDram into a > > pentium 1? There are parts of the world where people earn the equivalent > > of 0.25 euros an hour. That means 2 weeks of work for my cheap 2 sticks > > of memory. > > Yeah, exactly. Or maybe you're studying and don't work. Or maybe you're > studying and work only just pays the bills. Or maybe you're unemployed. > Or maybe your area has high living costs ... there are a great deal of > reasons why telling everyone to buy better hardware is absolutely the > wrong thing to say. Yes. It's what MS has been telling us for years. > > > My sister has 32mb. Again, works, but isn't the greatest. > > > > I found 48 megs horrible under win98. > > Depends what you put there. I spent a lot of time tuning her machine to > get it halfway to usable. I heard about a version of win98 "lite", that would come without IE. It would even make a stab at stability :p > Well, you can, just try a few things: > * .ICE-unix > * disable klipper, kwrited and korgac Kde without Klipper? Hmmm... > * generally disable stuff you don't use > * schedule cron jobs for 4am :) -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 12:15:13PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 09:22, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Umm, it's still about $au60-80; people often don't have that money to > > spare. My AthlonXP 2400+ is a direct upgrade from the PII 350, which I > > had for ages. > > Oh gosh, here we go again, a member of the "hardware is so cheap today" > school. Certain companies in Silicon Valley have been funding members of that > school for ages (after all it takes lots of manhours to write enough code for > an OS that takes up 100 megs). I upgraded my pentium a while ago (correction: > I replaced a faulty memory chip with a working one) from 48 to 80 megs. > Costed me 25 euro, and that was a bargain. Normally I'd buy a lot more for " > banks of 32 megs. Um, I'm not a "hardware is so cheap today" guy. I've spent most of the thread pointing out why saying "hardware's cheap, go buy it" is a ridiculous assertion. > Yes I am talking about EDO ram of course! ever tried putting SDram into a > pentium 1? There are parts of the world where people earn the equivalent of > 0.25 euros an hour. That means 2 weeks of work for my cheap 2 sticks of > memory. Yeah, exactly. Or maybe you're studying and don't work. Or maybe you're studying and work only just pays the bills. Or maybe you're unemployed. Or maybe your area has high living costs ... there are a great deal of reasons why telling everyone to buy better hardware is absolutely the wrong thing to say. > > 128mb, as I have repeatedly stated, works. I'll drag the PII back out to > > prove a point, in fact. Hell, it even works fine on my P233MMX laptop, > > complete with 48mb of RAM. Disable klipper, chown .ICE-unix, disable > > kwrited, disable kalarmd, and you've got an entirely usable system on a > > low-end machine. > > Just tried the ice-unix trick and it helps a great deal. It's nifty. :) > > My sister has 32mb. Again, works, but isn't the greatest. > > I found 48 megs horrible under win98. Depends what you put there. I spent a lot of time tuning her machine to get it halfway to usable. > > The point is that your figures of 256mb are extremely irresponsible, > > considering users respect you somewhat for your packaging, and I'd > > prefer you either checked your facts with a program you knew not to be > > incorrect, or just left it alone. It runs fine on anything from 64mb > > upwards, and even on 48mb, if you tune it a bit. > > On such a machine I never run the DE besides, only applications on top of, > say, Windowmaker. Well, you can, just try a few things: * .ICE-unix * disable klipper, kwrited and korgac * generally disable stuff you don't use * schedule cron jobs for 4am -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgp7XPdpwqdZ1.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 01:03:38PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote: > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 11:56, Daniel Stone wrote: > > Maybe in, say, DDR. > > 256 megs ddr = 80 euro. Reason my box has 256 meg :) I'll upgrade once I have > a game that needs more for textures. Well, I'm talking Australian dollars. There was a reason why I still had the PII when I *maintained* KDE. > > It's pretty simple - there's even a HOWTO around. > > Url? Google is your friend. :) > > For me, it meant Konsole with a few tabs open, a couple of Konq > > sessions, a KWord session, and Mutt having a good go at a 40,000-mail > > Maildir. > > I use kmail for 5000 mail-maildirs ;) KMail kinda sucked back then, and I now have all my mail at work, so read it with Mutt in a remote session. > > I don't see why you'd "need" OpenOffice or Mozilla. > > OOo is also ridiculous. It should share nore with the other available open > source software - such as widgets. I'd be delighted to save my files with > those gorgeous QT dialogs instead of the pathetic built-in windows ui clone > they use now. I wonder why Sun hasn't used Motif for the Staroffice UI > actually. OOo is ridiculous in so many ways, including a 15min startup time on lower-end machines. It's the worst benchmark of anything you could possibly pick. > > BTW, KGhostView posed no difficulties with huge PDFs, either. Not even > > image-laden ones, on my laptop. > > KGhostview is still buggy. The first pdf my dad tried to open with it showed > up sideways, off course the rest of the page in place. Grmbl... Did you report a bug? :) > > And, as someone pointed out, most of the RAM being "used" is actually > > just cache, so it's non-critical if it gets swapped out. > > ... and virtual memory under Linux is "pretty good". It's monitoring it that > sucks ;) *nod*. > > I agree that memory is cheap, right. My box has 512mb of 333MHz DDR, > > soon to be 1gb. Problem is that people often don't have even $au60 to > > spare, or maybe are stuck with old boxes with older, more expensive RAM, > > or whatever. I was in that situation for quite a while. > > > > Or maybe they're saving to get a whole new machine, this time with DDR. > > > > 128mb to run any OS is stupid, 256 ridiculous. If your assertions were > > true, I'd be demanding KDE go straight back to the drawing board. > > Actually I'd appreciate if someone took parts of kdebase and libs under the > magnifier glass again :) . > > But anywa, they're going in the right direction. Performance has had a lot of > attention between 2.2.2 and 3.0, and kde becomes more modular each release. And even between 3.0 and 3.1, it's had attention. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgp3CusLj3eB6.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 11:56, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 11:10:05AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 09.22 skrev Daniel Stone: > > > Not to mention 64mb. > > > > Well, where I live, 128MB appears to be the smallest size sold in common > > shops. > > Maybe in, say, DDR. 256 megs ddr = 80 euro. Reason my box has 256 meg :) I'll upgrade once I have a game that needs more for textures. > > If you know how to "tune" the system to run in 48MB, you don't need any > > recommendations. If you don't know anything, you might need > > recommendations. Linux automatically uses spare memory for disk caching, > > so being starved on RAM not only causes swapping to disk of virtual > > memory, it also reduces the disk cache which increases disk traffic. So > > RAM starvation reduces performance a lot. > > It's pretty simple - there's even a HOWTO around. Url? > > I have no clue about what you do in 128MB, but using the computer for me > > means more than just starting KDE, and checking that it works. It might > > involve using some memory hungry program like Open Office (start office), > > surfing the web (which might require netscape), and then some picture > > handling for creating web pages. Everything common task that many expect > > to be able to do. And here I have not even mentioned compiling KDE > > programs. These programs need their REM, in additional to what KDE > > already uses, adding up to the requirement. All these activities benefits > > much more from enough RAM than a fast processor. > > For me, it meant Konsole with a few tabs open, a couple of Konq > sessions, a KWord session, and Mutt having a good go at a 40,000-mail > Maildir. I use kmail for 5000 mail-maildirs ;) > I don't see why you'd "need" OpenOffice or Mozilla. OOo is also ridiculous. It should share nore with the other available open source software - such as widgets. I'd be delighted to save my files with those gorgeous QT dialogs instead of the pathetic built-in windows ui clone they use now. I wonder why Sun hasn't used Motif for the Staroffice UI actually. > BTW, KGhostView posed no difficulties with huge PDFs, either. Not even > image-laden ones, on my laptop. KGhostview is still buggy. The first pdf my dad tried to open with it showed up sideways, off course the rest of the page in place. Grmbl... > And, as someone pointed out, most of the RAM being "used" is actually > just cache, so it's non-critical if it gets swapped out. ... and virtual memory under Linux is "pretty good". It's monitoring it that sucks ;) > I agree that memory is cheap, right. My box has 512mb of 333MHz DDR, > soon to be 1gb. Problem is that people often don't have even $au60 to > spare, or maybe are stuck with old boxes with older, more expensive RAM, > or whatever. I was in that situation for quite a while. > > Or maybe they're saving to get a whole new machine, this time with DDR. > > 128mb to run any OS is stupid, 256 ridiculous. If your assertions were > true, I'd be demanding KDE go straight back to the drawing board. Actually I'd appreciate if someone took parts of kdebase and libs under the magnifier glass again :) . But anywa, they're going in the right direction. Performance has had a lot of attention between 2.2.2 and 3.0, and kde becomes more modular each release. > However, the experience of everyone shows that it's certainly *not* > true. gmemusage doth not a usage report make. -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 09:22, Daniel Stone wrote: > On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:50:29AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 07.44 skrev Daniel Stone: > > > 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure > > > to be bandying around. > > > > Memory chips often comes in 128MB increments, don't they? > > Not to mention 64mb. > > > So the choice is between 128 or 256. > > Or 64. Or 96. > > > My recommendation is to get that 256. The > > cost is not great nowadays. 128Mb is about the cost of one night out, so > > it just means not going to that club one weekend and instead going to the > > nearest shop for some RAM, and spend the evening putting it in, breaking > > your nails and scratching your nuckles is the process. > > Umm, it's still about $au60-80; people often don't have that money to > spare. My AthlonXP 2400+ is a direct upgrade from the PII 350, which I > had for ages. Oh gosh, here we go again, a member of the "hardware is so cheap today" school. Certain companies in Silicon Valley have been funding members of that school for ages (after all it takes lots of manhours to write enough code for an OS that takes up 100 megs). I upgraded my pentium a while ago (correction: I replaced a faulty memory chip with a working one) from 48 to 80 megs. Costed me 25 euro, and that was a bargain. Normally I'd buy a lot more for " banks of 32 megs. Yes I am talking about EDO ram of course! ever tried putting SDram into a pentium 1? There are parts of the world where people earn the equivalent of 0.25 euros an hour. That means 2 weeks of work for my cheap 2 sticks of memory. > 128mb, as I have repeatedly stated, works. I'll drag the PII back out to > prove a point, in fact. Hell, it even works fine on my P233MMX laptop, > complete with 48mb of RAM. Disable klipper, chown .ICE-unix, disable > kwrited, disable kalarmd, and you've got an entirely usable system on a > low-end machine. Just tried the ice-unix trick and it helps a great deal. > > One of my friends has 64MB on her windows-98 machine. That works, but is > > not the greatest. > > My sister has 32mb. Again, works, but isn't the greatest. I found 48 megs horrible under win98. > The point is that your figures of 256mb are extremely irresponsible, > considering users respect you somewhat for your packaging, and I'd > prefer you either checked your facts with a program you knew not to be > incorrect, or just left it alone. It runs fine on anything from 64mb > upwards, and even on 48mb, if you tune it a bit. On such a machine I never run the DE besides, only applications on top of, say, Windowmaker. -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 07:19, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > Which is why I say that for practical purposes, it appears that 256MB is a > reasonable amount of RAM, in my opinion. Unless you run just only kmail + > one instance of konqueror and noth more. Then 128MB might be allright. > Which does not mean that it does not work with less. But it can cause a lot > of paging and swapping and thus gives a slow system, no matter how many MHz > there is in the processor. Nowadays my pentium 133 has 80 megs ram, but I ran it with 48. It swaps, but not until the point that it is not useful anymore. I find the memory reqirements of kde also excessive, but kde still isn't Windows Xp :) > KDE 2.2 is a different animal altogether. On small machines that works much > better. I even run single KDE 3.1 applications on my 100MHz pentium > firewall machine. (kmyfirewall, and sometimes konsole. Nothing else of KDE > is installed on it. Something that can't be done with the official SID KDE) Why not? -- Frank Van Damme| "Saying 8MB of RAM doesn't do as much anymore is http://www.| like saying a gallon of water holds more than it openstandaarden.be | did in 1988."--George Adkins
Re: problems with kdepim-libs and kalarm on Woody
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 10:10, Ralf Nolden wrote: > dpkg --purge --force-all kalarmd libkcal2 > apt-get -f install Thanks for the advice but I had to purge libkgantt0, too: Unpacking kdepim-libs (from .../kdepim-libs_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb) ... dpkg: error processing /var/cache/apt/archives/kdepim-libs_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb (--unpack): trying to overwrite `/usr/lib/libkgantt.so.0.0.2', which is also in package libkgantt0 dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe) Now I installed kdepim-libs, kaddressbook, kalarm and korganizer. with regards, Max Moritz Sievers
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 11:10:05AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 09.22 skrev Daniel Stone: > > Not to mention 64mb. > > Well, where I live, 128MB appears to be the smallest size sold in common > shops. Maybe in, say, DDR. > > The point is that your figures of 256mb are extremely irresponsible, > > considering users respect you somewhat for your packaging, and I'd > > prefer you either checked your facts with a program you knew not to be > > incorrect, or just left it alone. It runs fine on anything from 64mb > > upwards, and even on 48mb, if you tune it a bit. > > If you know how to "tune" the system to run in 48MB, you don't need any > recommendations. If you don't know anything, you might need recommendations. > Linux automatically uses spare memory for disk caching, so being starved on > RAM not only causes swapping to disk of virtual memory, it also reduces the > disk cache which increases disk traffic. So RAM starvation reduces > performance a lot. It's pretty simple - there's even a HOWTO around. > I have no clue about what you do in 128MB, but using the computer for me > means > more than just starting KDE, and checking that it works. It might involve > using some memory hungry program like Open Office (start office), surfing the > web (which might require netscape), and then some picture handling for > creating web pages. Everything common task that many expect to be able to do. > And here I have not even mentioned compiling KDE programs. These programs > need their REM, in additional to what KDE already uses, adding up to the > requirement. All these activities benefits much more from enough RAM than a > fast processor. For me, it meant Konsole with a few tabs open, a couple of Konq sessions, a KWord session, and Mutt having a good go at a 40,000-mail Maildir. I don't see why you'd "need" OpenOffice or Mozilla. BTW, KGhostView posed no difficulties with huge PDFs, either. Not even image-laden ones, on my laptop. And, as someone pointed out, most of the RAM being "used" is actually just cache, so it's non-critical if it gets swapped out. > I might consider 192MB enough, but as it is hard to get 64MB memory chips, > there are often very few slots to put the memory in, and memory is so cheap, > then better go with 256MB from the beginning. Or to upgrade with 128MB from > whatever is there in the computer already. 64mb is plenty, IME. And the "tuning" amounts to little other than disabling what you don't need - nothing perplexing. I agree that memory is cheap, right. My box has 512mb of 333MHz DDR, soon to be 1gb. Problem is that people often don't have even $au60 to spare, or maybe are stuck with old boxes with older, more expensive RAM, or whatever. I was in that situation for quite a while. Or maybe they're saving to get a whole new machine, this time with DDR. 128mb to run any OS is stupid, 256 ridiculous. If your assertions were true, I'd be demanding KDE go straight back to the drawing board. However, the experience of everyone shows that it's certainly *not* true. gmemusage doth not a usage report make. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpc6YBZYfr9k.pgp Description: PGP signature
Bug in KDE(?) crashes X Server
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 hi there, I have an interesting bug here: I move one of my icons on my KDE 3.1.1(Sid) Desktop to another position, click somewhere so that the icon lose it's focus, move the mouse back over the icon and my X completly hangs (sometimes I have to do that two times). I have to log on from another maschine an kill X to get back to work... After searching a bit I found someone with the same problem and he says it disappears when I enable the X font server. So I think this is somehow related to fonts and X. Haven't tried that myself... (I have no need for an X Font Server...) I use X 4.3.0 (from http://penguinppc.org/~daniels/sid/i386) and KDE 3.1.1 (from Sid) and I would like to know if someone can reproduce this bug or has a solution for this... so long, Timo -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+k+ohjNwL1Ro7KAwRAvjOAJsFJ7GmuTbSKPO/3m01G40S2MIuQQCgrKOp k4e51Hh4ER6xtzCH/iZu05I= =4Aa+ -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: kmail & cryptplug anyone?
Mika, I am using a couple of scripts called from the startkde script, as there doesn't seem to be a way to call scripts on session shutdown (that I know of). I have attached the gpgagent shutdown script I use. It just reads the process ID from the GPG_AGENT_INFO environment variable, and kills it. Hope this helps, Toby killgpgagent Description: application/shellscript
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 09.22 skrev Daniel Stone: > Not to mention 64mb. Well, where I live, 128MB appears to be the smallest size sold in common shops. > The point is that your figures of 256mb are extremely irresponsible, > considering users respect you somewhat for your packaging, and I'd > prefer you either checked your facts with a program you knew not to be > incorrect, or just left it alone. It runs fine on anything from 64mb > upwards, and even on 48mb, if you tune it a bit. If you know how to "tune" the system to run in 48MB, you don't need any recommendations. If you don't know anything, you might need recommendations. Linux automatically uses spare memory for disk caching, so being starved on RAM not only causes swapping to disk of virtual memory, it also reduces the disk cache which increases disk traffic. So RAM starvation reduces performance a lot. I have no clue about what you do in 128MB, but using the computer for me means more than just starting KDE, and checking that it works. It might involve using some memory hungry program like Open Office (start office), surfing the web (which might require netscape), and then some picture handling for creating web pages. Everything common task that many expect to be able to do. And here I have not even mentioned compiling KDE programs. These programs need their REM, in additional to what KDE already uses, adding up to the requirement. All these activities benefits much more from enough RAM than a fast processor. I might consider 192MB enough, but as it is hard to get 64MB memory chips, there are often very few slots to put the memory in, and memory is so cheap, then better go with 256MB from the beginning. Or to upgrade with 128MB from whatever is there in the computer already. Karolina
Re: kmail cc and bcc not working
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 09:34:45 +0200 Adrian 'Dagurashibanipal' von Bidder <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Works fine here. I guess it's probably some bad interaction between > kmail and the outgoing mail transport. What outgoing mail transport > are you using? If you use the local sendmail, you should have the log > in /var/log/mail.log. Hello Adrian, The mail gets delivered directly to the SMTP at his ISP, so there are no logs :-( But we'll test it using exim or sth. else to figure it out. Thank's for your reply, Marc pgpCmX3eWDOHF.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: problems with kdepim-libs and kalarm on Woody
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Tuesday 08 April 2003 22:45, Max Moritz Sievers wrote: > Hello, > I tried to update from KDE 3.1 to 3.1.1 on Woody. > There are errors with the packages kdepim-libs and kalarm. > > Here is the output of dselect: dpkg --purge --force-all kalarmd libkcal2 apt-get -f install > > The following NEW packages will be installed: > kaddressbook kalarm kdepim-libs > 0 packages upgraded, 3 newly installed, 0 to remove and 0 not upgraded. > Need to get 992kB of archives. After unpacking 3260kB will be used. > Do you want to continue? [Y/n] > Get:1 http://download.kde.org stable/main kdepim-libs 4:3.1.1-0woody1 > [395kB] Get:2 http://download.kde.org stable/main kaddressbook > 4:3.1.1-0woody1 [298kB] Get:3 http://download.kde.org stable/main kalarm > 4:3.1.1-0woody1 [298kB] Fetched 992kB in 2m16s (7252B/s) > (Reading database ... 91884 files and directories currently installed.) > Unpacking kdepim-libs (from .../kdepim-libs_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb) ... > dpkg: error processing > /var/cache/apt/archives/kdepim-libs_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb (--unpack): > trying to overwrite `/usr/lib/libkcal.so.2.0.0', which is also in package > libkcal2 dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe) > Unpacking kaddressbook (from .../kaddressbook_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb) > ... Unpacking kalarm (from .../kalarm_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb) ... > dpkg: error processing > /var/cache/apt/archives/kalarm_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb (--unpack): > trying to overwrite `/usr/bin/kalarmd', which is also in package kalarmd > dpkg-deb: subprocess paste killed by signal (Broken pipe) > Errors were encountered while processing: > /var/cache/apt/archives/kdepim-libs_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb > /var/cache/apt/archives/kalarm_4%3a3.1.1-0woody1_i386.deb > E: Sub-process /usr/bin/dpkg returned an error code (1) > Some errors occurred while unpacking. I'm going to configure the > packages that were installed. This may result in duplicate errors > or errors caused by missing dependencies. This is OK, only the errors > above this message are important. Please fix them and run [I]nstall again > Press enter to continue. > > dpkg: dependency problems prevent configuration of kaddressbook: > kaddressbook depends on kdepim-libs (>= 4:3.1.1); however: > Package kdepim-libs is not installed. > dpkg: error processing kaddressbook (--configure): > dependency problems - leaving unconfigured > Errors were encountered while processing: > kaddressbook > > installation script returned error exit status 100. > > > with regards, > Max Moritz Sievers > > -- System Information > Debian Release: 3.0 > Architecture: i386 > Kernel: Linux t-dialin 2.2.20 #1 SMP Wed Oct 30 13:55:36 CET 2002 i686 > Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=C - -- We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs. - Ralf Nolden [EMAIL PROTECTED] The K Desktop Environment The KDevelop Project http://www.kde.org http://www.kdevelop.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+k9WRu0nKi+w1Ky8RAnJIAJ9GwX2nujXXhyWTqd+1jSdQgf15vQCgqH79 +YnAckm1gcmQ8uLjWlS18+A= =HR/o -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: noatun and files which are actually not mounted
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wednesday 09 April 2003 07:37, Wolfgang Mader wrote: > hello, > > if i shut down my computer i there are allways some songs in the playlist > of noatun but the partition on which this songs are stored is not monted on > start up. Noatun now tries to play this songs and in the taskbar there > apears the hint stopped because noatun is not able to find the songs. > This is not bad till now but this behaviour slows down my whole system. > Is this a bug or is there a way round or is my system too slow (500MHz) to > handle this situation? Please file a bugreport on bugs.kde.org. Thank you. Ralf > Thank you for your help > wolfgang > -- > Und dann hat er Sie geküsst > Wo das Meer zu Ende ist > Ihre Lippen schwach und blass > Und seine Augen werden nass > > Ramms+ein - Mutter - Nebel - -- We're not a company, we just produce better code at less costs. - Ralf Nolden [EMAIL PROTECTED] The K Desktop Environment The KDevelop Project http://www.kde.org http://www.kdevelop.org -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+k9fIu0nKi+w1Ky8RAhsOAJ42rx3/6pd+MXFGJpI5NIq0Da4g2wCgszpq YT+gol/RU7wODCTPZ+BkSY0= =80A2 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Daniel Stone wrote: |> I have edited /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh I haven't rebooted yet, so I |> don't know if it works. | | Probably, but you're not getting rid of any stale files inside of | .ICE-unix. :) True. I could discard that and instead do the following in /etc/init.d/xfree86-common case "$1" in ~ start) ~set_up_socket_dir ~SOCKET_DIR=/tmp/.ICE-unix # Added ~set_up_socket_dir # Added ~ ;; That would create the .ICE-unix dir just like the .X11-unix dir... Regards, Søren. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQE+k9LCcbQPnYLQykcRAqXpAJ42QRp90T2ipzaZd1gSBA3sUl3IwQCeNg/Y QM9CEYJuKXl/PhDlyW0DUvs= =TGPH -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:09:54AM +0200, S?ren Friis-Nielsen wrote:
> I have edited /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh
> About 40 lines down I added a line:
>
> ( cd /tmp && \
> ~ find . -xdev \
> ~ $TEXPR \
> ~ ! -name . \
> ~ ! \( -name lost+found -uid 0 \) \
> ~ ! \( -name quota.user -uid 0 \) \
> ~ ! \( -name quota.group -uid 0 \) \
> ~ ! \( -name .ICE-unix -uid 0 \) \ # This is the new line
> ~ ! \( -name .journal -uid 0 \) \
> ~-depth -exec rm -rf -- {} \; )
> rm -f /tmp/.X*-lock
>
> I haven't rebooted yet, so I don't know if it works.
Probably, but you're not getting rid of any stale files inside of
.ICE-unix. :)
--
Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org
pgpBD4XbP95Gb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
Re: kmail cc and bcc not working
On Tuesday 08 April 2003 19:37, Marc Tinnemeyer wrote: > So my question is, has anybody here every experienced sth. like that, or > is there a way to check what kmail is doing with CC and BCC ? Works fine here. I guess it's probably some bad interaction between kmail and the outgoing mail transport. What outgoing mail transport are you using? If you use the local sendmail, you should have the log in /var/log/mail.log. cheers -- vbi -- random link of the day: http://fortytwo.ch/sienapei/shouhaer pgpcHmJcx7xRg.pgp Description: signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:22:51AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > The whole discussion was how much RAM is needed, and in my opinion, 128MB is > too little. It works, but causes a lot of swapping with normal things like > web browsing etc. The best and cheapest speed up for a 128MB system is to get > more ram. I am using Debian SID with KDE3.1 on a Sony Vaio Laptop with a PIII-650 MHz and 128 MB RAM. My main applications are Konqueror, Konsole and XEmacs and sometimes I also run mozilla and the system runs really fine. I doubt that my system is swapping a lot. I am pretty sure, most of the huge amount of memeory that is used by XFree86 and kdeinit is in reality cache. Don't trust top. Take care, Michael
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:50:29AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 07.44 skrev Daniel Stone: > > 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure > > to be bandying around. > > Memory chips often comes in 128MB increments, don't they? Not to mention 64mb. > So the choice is between 128 or 256. Or 64. Or 96. > My recommendation is to get that 256. The > cost is not great nowadays. 128Mb is about the cost of one night out, so it > just means not going to that club one weekend and instead going to the > nearest shop for some RAM, and spend the evening putting it in, breaking your > nails and scratching your nuckles is the process. Umm, it's still about $au60-80; people often don't have that money to spare. My AthlonXP 2400+ is a direct upgrade from the PII 350, which I had for ages. 128mb, as I have repeatedly stated, works. I'll drag the PII back out to prove a point, in fact. Hell, it even works fine on my P233MMX laptop, complete with 48mb of RAM. Disable klipper, chown .ICE-unix, disable kwrited, disable kalarmd, and you've got an entirely usable system on a low-end machine. > One of my friends has 64MB on her windows-98 machine. That works, but is not > the greatest. My sister has 32mb. Again, works, but isn't the greatest. The point is that your figures of 256mb are extremely irresponsible, considering users respect you somewhat for your packaging, and I'd prefer you either checked your facts with a program you knew not to be incorrect, or just left it alone. It runs fine on anything from 64mb upwards, and even on 48mb, if you tune it a bit. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpU6HsK1Is1f.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:34:43AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > That might be. Which program is a good presentation tool? Some that > graphically shows me what all the RAM is used for. > I use it to get an approximate picture of what is going on. The individual > numbers are not important, but rather what is going on in general. vmstat is useful, if global. Used in conjunction with top you have all the information you need. > I started to use gmemusage when my system started trashing, and I just didn't > know what caused it. gmemusage shows me immediately which application is > trying to grab a lot of RAM. I can also see if it is something I intended, or > if it is something unexpected, or created by some crazy web page. I find that > some applications use a lot of RAM, and maybe avoid them for certain common > tasks. Well, it's more that they just allocate a lot of pixmaps. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgprzU4mv2TSh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:11:27AM -0400, Matt Sheffield wrote: > That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian > deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix and > all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time you start > your machine up from scratch. But once these things have been set up, I've > found that KDE will start up quite speedily. > > I don't like the slow first startup as I can't leave my system on all the > time. I'd like to disable /tmp clearing and clean things up myself. How does > one go about this? Which init scrip is it? Well, I just edited /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh and added the following lines, after it clears /tmp: mkdir /tmp/.ICE-unix chmod 777 /tmp/.ICE-unix chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix (note: 777 probably isn't the correct permissions, you may want sticky as well, but I'm the only one using this system, sooo ...) -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpfYTLo1jZmY.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Sheffield wrote:
| That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian
| deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the
.ICE-unix and
| all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time
you start
| your machine up from scratch. But once these things have been set up,
I've
| found that KDE will start up quite speedily.
|
| I don't like the slow first startup as I can't leave my system on all the
| time. I'd like to disable /tmp clearing and clean things up myself.
How does
| one go about this? Which init scrip is it?
I have edited /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh
About 40 lines down I added a line:
( cd /tmp && \
~ find . -xdev \
~ $TEXPR \
~ ! -name . \
~ ! \( -name lost+found -uid 0 \) \
~ ! \( -name quota.user -uid 0 \) \
~ ! \( -name quota.group -uid 0 \) \
~ ! \( -name .ICE-unix -uid 0 \) \ # This is the new line
~ ! \( -name .journal -uid 0 \) \
~-depth -exec rm -rf -- {} \; )
rm -f /tmp/.X*-lock
I haven't rebooted yet, so I don't know if it works.
Regards,
Søren.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
iD8DBQE+k8dCcbQPnYLQykcRAuS7AJ93fiM4DS2Q+Ktbikb+NgRW4S40qwCfShCY
6RCXJuag2YkiYX0mmHes5U0=
=4G2O
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:22:51AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > The normal web browsers appears to be pretty bad, when it comes to memory. > Just starting netscape/mozilla, will eat 75MB of RAM. Each instance of > konqueror takes around 10MB extra. They also causes X to allocate more > memory, which it does not give back. So it might be that X has memory leaks, > after all. If you say "here, allocate memory for this pixmap", and then never tell it to free it, it's hardly X's fault, is it? Mozilla is notorious for leaking horribly. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgp5JtjFqgFQh.pgp Description: PGP signature
Compiling for i686
Does anyone know if compiling for i686 instead of for i386 would give any speed increase greater than very marginal? Any real-life tests anywhere?
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 04:11 pm, Matt Sheffield wrote: > That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian > deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix > ... > time. I'd like to disable /tmp clearing and clean things up myself. How > does one go about this? Which init scrip is it? /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh I'd be interested to know if there are any unexpectd side-affects by doing this... maybe a selective clearing of junk but leave the X/KDE stuff ? --markc
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 07.44 skrev Daniel Stone: > 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure > to be bandying around. Memory chips often comes in 128MB increments, don't they? So the choice is between 128 or 256. My recommendation is to get that 256. The cost is not great nowadays. 128Mb is about the cost of one night out, so it just means not going to that club one weekend and instead going to the nearest shop for some RAM, and spend the evening putting it in, breaking your nails and scratching your nuckles is the process. One of my friends has 64MB on her windows-98 machine. That works, but is not the greatest. Karolina
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 00.25 skrev Andreas Pakulat: > What are you all doing? kdeinit has 58Megs here, running. And I don't > think that gmemusage is a good presentation tool, it shows me that: > xmms(178XXXK) + galeon-bin(218232K) + python2.1(144408K) = 540 Megs. > Which is what I got totally (250 Megs RAM, 290 Megs Swap)! That might be. Which program is a good presentation tool? Some that graphically shows me what all the RAM is used for. I use it to get an approximate picture of what is going on. The individual numbers are not important, but rather what is going on in general. I started to use gmemusage when my system started trashing, and I just didn't know what caused it. gmemusage shows me immediately which application is trying to grab a lot of RAM. I can also see if it is something I intended, or if it is something unexpected, or created by some crazy web page. I find that some applications use a lot of RAM, and maybe avoid them for certain common tasks.
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 03:34, Daniel Stone wrote: > > I just tried the > > chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix > > /etc/init.d/kdm restart > > and it really kicks it. Increadible but this this reduces the KDE startup > > time to 1/3. Maybe there are other tweaks. I will go on trying, maybe > > Even if some startup script fixes this permission, it still makes no > > sense to me. > > Well, as I said, it makes ICE use a faster IPC mechanism. I have done this on my system now and for the record, my system does not seem any faster at all. A couple of things appears to a bit faster, but other things seem to actually be slower after this. I have added it to a S25 startup script I have written. Anders -- This email was generated using KMail from KDE 3.1 on Debian GNU/Linux
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 00.32 skrev kosh: > X memory usage is evil black magic to figure out. > It also includes AGP mapped memory, pixmaps and stuff that programs have > open get charged to X and damned if I know how much other stuff it has. At > one point I had X showing it was using 1G of ram on a system with 256MB > with no swap usage at all. The card had 64MB and I had left the bios at > default for AGP size. I have 4MB on my graphics card, which means that if X is charged with that, it won't matter very much. But I have found that starting some graphical applications causes X memory to grow A LOT. The normal web browsers appears to be pretty bad, when it comes to memory. Just starting netscape/mozilla, will eat 75MB of RAM. Each instance of konqueror takes around 10MB extra. They also causes X to allocate more memory, which it does not give back. So it might be that X has memory leaks, after all. The whole discussion was how much RAM is needed, and in my opinion, 128MB is too little. It works, but causes a lot of swapping with normal things like web browsing etc. The best and cheapest speed up for a 128MB system is to get more RAM. Karolina
Re: KDE 3.1.1 on woody keyboard shortcuts
You could not find the options in KControl|Regional & Accessibility|Keyboard Shortcuts? On Tuesday, April 8, 2003 2:24 am, Neven Rodinis wrote: > On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 08:27:29AM -0700, Matt Sheffield wrote: > > Are you trying to access the shortcuts from the Preferences menu? If > > so, you won't be able to as there is a bug in the menu structure. Did > > you try using the KDE Control Center? > > That is exactly what I tried to do but it didn't work for me.
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix and all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time you start your machine up from scratch. But once these things have been set up, I've found that KDE will start up quite speedily. I don't like the slow first startup as I can't leave my system on all the time. I'd like to disable /tmp clearing and clean things up myself. How does one go about this? Which init scrip is it? On Tuesday, April 8, 2003 9:11 pm, Hendrik Sattler wrote: > I just tried the > chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix > /etc/init.d/kdm restart > and it really kicks it. Increadible but this this reduces the KDE startup > time to 1/3. Maybe there are other tweaks. I will go on trying, maybe > leaving away some ssh-agent helps. > But looking at it: this makes absolutely no sense! I am the only user of > this system and what-the-*#~# is going on here? > Is this a bug in X or a bug in KDE? > > Even if some startup script fixes this permission, it still makes no sense > to me. >
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 00:32, kosh wrote: > X memory usage is evil black magic to figure out. X is evil! Use fresco! - http://www.fresco.org -- This email was generated using KMail from KDE 3.1 on Debian GNU/Linux
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:21:43PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote: > Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until I > can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133. Also, I get an error when > trying to chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix. It says something about no such > directory. I added the hack to the xfree86-common initscript. Could this be > a problem? Should I add it to bootmisc.sh as stated earlier? TIA!! Well, you'll have to mkdir it, first. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgptPgFGHZ426.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 07:19:06AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote: > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 01.18 skrev Daniel Stone: > > I thought you'd know that saying how much memory kdeinit takes is > > *utterly* *useless*. Obviously not. > > It is not useless, as it says how much RAM is taken by KDE + some of the > applications. gmemusage just can't give a more find graded approach. > > Maybe there is a memory leak there somewhere, after all, since on a freshly > started X-server + KDE, the memory usage is much more reasonable. Which on my > system means 23MB for X, 23MB for kdeinit (KDE). With kmail 10MB, some other > KDE applications 7MB, that means 63MB to run a basic X + KDE. And that > includes even one instance konqueror. Cached pixmaps and video memory are taken into account here. vmstat is slightly more useful, but still, not very. > That amount starts to grow after a while, and never goes down to that level > again. > > Which is why I say that for practical purposes, it appears that 256MB is a > reasonable amount of RAM, in my opinion. Unless you run just only kmail + one > instance of konqueror and noth more. Then 128MB might be allright. Which does > not mean that it does not work with less. But it can cause a lot of paging > and swapping and thus gives a slow system, no matter how many MHz there is in > the processor. I used to run Konsole, Evolution, and a few instances of Konq, on the PII 350 with 128mb of RAM. As well as the P166 with 96mb of RAM. Granted, KDE certainly does take up a bit more RAM than I'd like, but it's not as bad as you make out. 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure to be bandying around. > > I never had any problems with KDE 2.2 on a P166 with 64 (later 96) mb of > > RAM, nor the PII 350 with 128mb of RAM. > > KDE 2.2 is a different animal altogether. On small machines that works much > better. I even run single KDE 3.1 applications on my 100MHz pentium firewall > machine. (kmyfirewall, and sometimes konsole. Nothing else of KDE is > installed on it. Something that can't be done with the official SID KDE) If anything, I've found KDE 3.1 to be a huge speed improvement, for not much RAM tradeoff. -- Daniel Stone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> KDE: Konquering a desktop near you - http://www.kde.org pgpY10R4WUCZB.pgp Description: PGP signature
noatun and files which are actually not mounted
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 hello, if i shut down my computer i there are allways some songs in the playlist of noatun but the partition on which this songs are stored is not monted on start up. Noatun now tries to play this songs and in the taskbar there apears the hint stopped because noatun is not able to find the songs. This is not bad till now but this behaviour slows down my whole system. Is this a bug or is there a way round or is my system too slow (500MHz) to handle this situation? Thank you for your help wolfgang - -- Und dann hat er Sie geküsst Wo das Meer zu Ende ist Ihre Lippen schwach und blass Und seine Augen werden nass Ramms+ein - Mutter - Nebel -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+k7GguEUiBhld/2URAtMcAJ99M8fQXHTXgLH556t1+4xKJzrNTQCbBo5v dfnNOOizxXQH08/MWyuK6/Q= =AkIt -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until I can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133. Also, I get an error when trying to chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix. It says something about no such directory. I added the hack to the xfree86-common initscript. Could this be a problem? Should I add it to bootmisc.sh as stated earlier? TIA!! NeoFax - Original Message - From: "Daniel Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Karolina Lindqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Debian-KDE" Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 4:18 PM Subject: Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
Re: KDE 3.1.1 Fast as root but slow as User
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 01.18 skrev Daniel Stone: > I thought you'd know that saying how much memory kdeinit takes is > *utterly* *useless*. Obviously not. It is not useless, as it says how much RAM is taken by KDE + some of the applications. gmemusage just can't give a more find graded approach. Maybe there is a memory leak there somewhere, after all, since on a freshly started X-server + KDE, the memory usage is much more reasonable. Which on my system means 23MB for X, 23MB for kdeinit (KDE). With kmail 10MB, some other KDE applications 7MB, that means 63MB to run a basic X + KDE. And that includes even one instance konqueror. That amount starts to grow after a while, and never goes down to that level again. Which is why I say that for practical purposes, it appears that 256MB is a reasonable amount of RAM, in my opinion. Unless you run just only kmail + one instance of konqueror and noth more. Then 128MB might be allright. Which does not mean that it does not work with less. But it can cause a lot of paging and swapping and thus gives a slow system, no matter how many MHz there is in the processor. > I never had any problems with KDE 2.2 on a P166 with 64 (later 96) mb of > RAM, nor the PII 350 with 128mb of RAM. KDE 2.2 is a different animal altogether. On small machines that works much better. I even run single KDE 3.1 applications on my 100MHz pentium firewall machine. (kmyfirewall, and sometimes konsole. Nothing else of KDE is installed on it. Something that can't be done with the official SID KDE) Karolina
Missing function Close Tab in Konqueror 3.1.1 from Ralf Nolden APT Repository
Does anyone have the same problem? If so, how do I fix it? NeoFax
