Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
Did you know about the big kernel power regression? My system (laptop) is always under 100% load no matter what the frequency I'm on (BOINC). Some stats (kernel 2.6.39.2) 2.17GHz -> >103°C (luckily BIOS is coming to rescue) 1.67GHz -> ~94°C 1.33GHz -> ~83°C 1.00GHz -> ~74°C Are you still going to say that frequency doesn't change heat that much? I'm not sure how can scale frequency accordingly to temperature (and that is the only thing I'm interested in) so I wrote program that is doing this for me. (dwibbling in /sys/devices/system/cpu/* ;) ) If you don't like something in Linux you can always change it, that is the beauty of it. But having the ability to change governor to powersave or performance just by changing simple configuration file is good thing. Having to compile new kernel just to change CPU governor is IMHO Very Bad Idea™. darkestkhan -- Feel free to CC me. jid: darkestk...@gmail.com May The Source be with You. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/banlktinfke6pfpeov7v+t9vosxzdx9c...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Mi, 15 iun 11, 23:47:31, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > On Mi, 15 iun 11, 12:55:54, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > Anyway, major distros should care about the state of the art for Linux > > multimedia, but they, including Debian, don't. > > "Debian" doesn't care about anything. Sorry, rephrasing this: Debian cares about quality and being the universal system. This is achieved by having lots of contributors working mostly on the packages they are interested in. It just happens that there are enough of them to have a lot of software packaged. Asking such contributors to care for your needs, a.k.a shift their interests, is futile. If you want something done you have to do it yourself or find somebody interested (possibly by paying that person) to do the work. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Mi, 15 iun 11, 12:55:54, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > Anyway, major distros should care about the state of the art for Linux > multimedia, but they, including Debian, don't. "Debian" doesn't care about anything. If there are people interested in improving Debian regarding multimedia it will be, otherwise not, it's that simple. > So called multimedia distros often fail, regarding to manpower, e.g. 64 > Studio and at least Ubuntu Studio fails, because they must be close to > Ubuntu, but the flashy folderol desktop approach of all distros, > including Debian, is a PITA for serious multimedia production. Debian just happens to default to Gnome, but it's trivial to install a desktop with Xfce or LXDE only, or even no Desktop Environment, if you don't need one. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 20:56 +1000, Scott Ferguson wrote: Hi Scott :) > much of what you seem to desire from Debian corresponds with the > Debian Multimedia Project tasks:- > http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia Yes. > Much of the > realtime-patches have been accepted in the mainline kernel, to the point > that for most purposes the stock Debian kernel is suitable even for > realtime-like work. No, not the current kernel, as soon as you start audio production, even a PREEMPT kernel won't do the job, you need a PREEMPT RT. Kernel 2.6.39.1 might work. I'll switch to mailing list digest and instead of being on-line I'll do a production using this kernel, as soon as I set up Debian testing completely. I'm under the weather at the moment, so I'm neither busy preparing my Linux, nor I'm jobhunting (nearly as important, as preparing Linux ;). spinymouse@debian:/usr/src$ ls linux-image* linux-image-2.6.33.9-rt31_2.6.33.9-rt31-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb linux-image-2.6.39.1_2.6.39.1-10.00.Custom_amd64.deb > what hope do they have of using Ardour Using > AVLinux http://www.bandshed.net/AVLinux.html could be an option, assumed that there will be no issues regarding to the hardware and 32-bit is preferred to 64-bit architecture. Those distros might be ok too, but I suspect > Musix GNU+Linux http://www.musix.org.ar/ > Studio to Go! http://www.ferventsoftware.com/ > Ubuntu Studio http://ubuntustudio.org/ > Puredyne http://puredyne.org/ them all shipping with some freakish tweak. At least http://dynebolic.org/ used a freakish kind of 'partition', called 'nest' or similar, some years ago. > I hope some of this proves useful to someone. I guess it's useful. I like to add http://wiki.linuxaudio.org/apps/start http://www.linuxaudio.org/ AND ESPECIALLY http://jackaudio.org/faq http://rg42.org/wiki/a3vtl Cheers! Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308137584.2444.250.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On 15/06/11 00:16, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:53 +, Camaleón wrote: > Hi Ralf, much of what you seem to desire from Debian corresponds with the Debian Multimedia Project tasks:- http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia "The Debian Multimedia project aims to make Debian a good platform for audio and multimedia work. This basically means packaging/maintaining multimedia applications and libraries, and collaborating with other maintainers or teams in order to improve audio/video support in Debian." With reference to RT in the kernel:- The Debian Multimedia team is not working on including a kernel image with the realtime-patches applied in Debian. Much of the realtime-patches have been accepted in the mainline kernel, to the point that for most purposes the stock Debian kernel is suitable even for realtime-like work. That's from:- http://wiki.debian.org/DebianMultimedia#Realtime_kernel Where you'll also find links to other repositories. As the Debian Multimedia Project has some of the original DeMuDi (later Studio64) developers - it would seem fragmentary not look for what you want there first. While re-compiling the kernel and tweaking the init settings may well be beyond the base user - a "base" user should never be more than an operator anyway. If the knowlege level is such that finding and reading documentation is beyond them - then what hope do they have of using Ardour - let alone Rosegarden? Even kernel building can be a point-and-click affair:- http://kcheck.sourceforge.net/ There are also the following Debian based distros that are optimised for multimedia:- 64 Studio http://www.64studio.com/ AVLinux http://www.bandshed.net/AVLinux.html Musix GNU+Linux http://www.musix.org.ar/ Studio to Go! http://www.ferventsoftware.com/ Ubuntu Studio http://ubuntustudio.org/ Puredyne http://puredyne.org/ I hope some of this proves useful to someone. Cheers -- We all pay for life with death, so everything in between should be free. ~ Bill Hicks -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4df88fca.1070...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 11:49 +0300, Andrei POPESCU wrote: > BTW, are you aware of 64studio? > http://www.64studio.com/ The best multimedia distro I know. I suspect Planet CCRMA as being equal, but it's a rpm based distro, so I suspect things to be a little bit different to Debian. The bad with 64 Studio is, that it's completely outdated. There might be up to date OEM versions, I don't know, but the latest free version is 3.3 alpha. For audio hardware is important, so issues for an outdated distro are not only regarding to software, but also regarding to hardware, since the support for professional audio cards isn't very good. For audio Linux already is equal to Microsoft and Apple, some things are less good, others are better, but only if you compile a lot yourself and tweak. All major distros don't care about state of the art Linux multimedia. Regarding to video, Linux still is far behind other OS. This month coders explained on Linux audio users list that this is regarding to manpower (time, money). Anyway, major distros should care about the state of the art for Linux multimedia, but they, including Debian, don't. So called multimedia distros often fail, regarding to manpower, e.g. 64 Studio and at least Ubuntu Studio fails, because they must be close to Ubuntu, but the flashy folderol desktop approach of all distros, including Debian, is a PITA for serious multimedia production. This is why there is no famous studio working with Linux, excepted of universities. Before posting links, search the LAU archive, what exactly famous studios do with Linux and what not. Famous video studios are using Linux, but not for the important artwork. I don't know any famous audio studio using Linux (excepted of some stand-alone-synth using Linux that has less to do with the Linux we use), although it seems to be possible today. 3D desktops and toy bullshit like this, that is absolutely good for nothing is supported by major distros, while e.g. GNOME2 will die, hence multimedia applications that today are stable, will become unstable again, resp. manpower is needed to rewrite some apps, anyway this might force people to change their work flows. No professional studio will change the work flow, Linux will become more unpopular for serious work, since there's no reliance that you are able to keep state of the art + your work flow. I'm using Linux for my home studio only, I never did a job using Linux. People using Linux professional seems to work for universities and small, non-famous professional studios and semi-professional studios. I might be mistaken and there might be one or two famous studios, any information about this is welcome. Cheers! Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308135354.2444.218.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Ma, 14 iun 11, 15:23:16, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > OT: Btw. 2.6.39.1 don't need a rt-patch anymore. I installed the > outdated proprietary nvidia driver, since there's no package for the > installer, for the current one, but I guess there's the current > proprietary driver for the 'regular' Debian kernel provided by a > package. I might be mistaken. If not I wonder why Debian make things > harder than there's the need to do. So I'll stay at the outdated one or > need to do anything manually, which is time consuming, because I already > had to build ALSA myself, rt capable kernels etc.. Debian seems to be > one of those multimedia unfriendly distros, while we are living in a > multimedia world. All kinds of flashy trash seems to be available, such > as 3D desktops etc.. BTW, are you aware of 64studio? http://www.64studio.com/ Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On 06/14/2011 09:59 PM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:10 +, Camaleón wrote: [snip] Ok, perhaps you don't have the tools to measure the load, so I won't ask you to do it, but ... Have you ever compared temperature and battery life when switching between ondemand and performance? How much is the difference on your machine? There's a big difference in terms of heat. Running my laptop on performance shoots the temperature up to 80c and higher whereas ondemand keeps it 45-80 (80 when ondemand decides it needs to go full throttle). Keeping in on performance heats up the laptop to a point where its uncomfortable to rest the palms on it. I most certainly do not want to see the kernel selecting performance as the default choice. Havent tested with battery but I suspect, the battery will run out faster when its on performance as opposed to ondemand if not for anything else, to power the cooling fans. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4df851c3.9090...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 19:24:22 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 17:00 +, Camaleón wrote: >> sm01@stt008:~$ grep -i "CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV" >> /boot/config-2.6.26-2-amd64 CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y # >> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE is not set # >> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set # >> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND is not set # >> CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE is not set >> >> Ha! :-P > > Too funny! > > Regarding to this I can't resist to reply again. > > Bizarre that my kernel is set to ondemand and yours to performance :D! > It should be vv ;). The nice about that is that both of us can get our desired setting! :-) > But just because I made a mistake when building my kernel and just > because the Debian's kernel default has got the wrong default too, the > script isn't good. The script is indeed very much needed: sm01@stt008:~$ cpufreq-info | grep governor available cpufreq governors: powersave, userspace, ondemand, conservative, performance The governor "ondemand" may decide which speed to use (...) sm01@stt008:~$ cpufreq-info | grep current current policy: frequency should be within 2.00 GHz and 2.83 GHz. current CPU frequency is 2.00 GHz. (...) Thanks to it (to the script) my CPU is not wasting resources nor energy blindingly: sm01@stt008:~$ cpufreq-info | grep stats cpufreq stats: 2.83 GHz:1,55%, 2.67 GHz:0,02%, 2.33 GHz:0,04%, 2.00 GHz:98,40% (6327) cpufreq stats: 2.83 GHz:1,83%, 2.67 GHz:0,03%, 2.33 GHz:0,05%, 2.00 GHz:98,10% (6833) cpufreq stats: 2.83 GHz:1,66%, 2.67 GHz:0,02%, 2.33 GHz:0,05%, 2.00 GHz:98,26% (6102) cpufreq stats: 2.83 GHz:1,51%, 2.67 GHz:0,02%, 2.33 GHz:0,03%, 2.00 GHz:98,44% (5240) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.14.17.37...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 17:00 +, Camaleón wrote: > sm01@stt008:~$ grep -i "CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV" > /boot/config-2.6.26-2-amd64 > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE is not set > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND is not set > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE is not set > > Ha! :-P Too funny! Regarding to this I can't resist to reply again. Bizarre that my kernel is set to ondemand and yours to performance :D! It should be vv ;). But just because I made a mistake when building my kernel and just because the Debian's kernel default has got the wrong default too, the script isn't good. Regarding to anything else, everything still is in the archive ;). I've written that I measured some machines, the resume seems to be to take care of the display's load, but forget about CPU load. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308072262.2218.289.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:29:36 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:10 +, Camaleón wrote: [snip] > > Ok, perhaps you don't have the tools to measure the load, so I won't ask > you to do it, but ... > > Have you ever compared temperature and battery life when switching > between ondemand and performance? What temp? CPU? Hard disks? Motherboard? VGA card? When you force your CPU to increase its cycles you are also adding extra heat to the rest of the components. If your system is not properly cooled, all of them will suffer. > How much is the difference on your machine? I have not tested but this is just a matter of physics, I guess :-) But in this regard I put my trust in developers that have decide this setting is the default, and should I had the reasons to do not agree, I would just change the value to fit my needs (the same way I prefer Postfix instead Exim or the same way I prefer "X" instead "Y"...). > For the machines I know there's quasi no difference for he temperature > and the measured watt, those machines don't use batteries, but watt > gives information about battery duration. So I guess you do have performed some tests about this so maybe you can share your findings with us. > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:15 +, Camaleón wrote: >> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:02:40 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >> >> > Why not using ondemand set by the kernel's default governor? >> >> Because then you will force users to recompile the kernel > > Why recompiling the kernel? Why not setting the default governor to > ondemand. I bet it's already set to ondemand. Because someone may want to change it? > For me it is > > spinymouse@debian:/boot$ cat config-2.6.39.1 | grep > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE is not set > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND=y > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE is not set > > I bet for you it is already set to ondemand. Let's see... sm01@stt008:~$ grep -i "CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV" /boot/config-2.6.26-2-amd64 CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE=y # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_POWERSAVE is not set # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND is not set # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE is not set Ha! :-P > If so, why adding the script? To be able to change it by the user by editing one file ;-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.14.17.00...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Wed, 2011-06-15 at 00:34 +0800, Jimmy Wu wrote: > > I assume that is so people who want something else will be able to > > change it without needing to recompile the kernel. Correct, but they have to know about a scrip ;). I don't think they do know, excepted of the experts ;). Since my kernel randomly is set to ondemand and I need performance as default, I could use the script, instead of compiling the kernel again, assumed nothing else randomly has a bad setting. So for me the script might be an advantage, nevertheless it's less good for many inexperienced audio users. Ok, I guess this is enough correspondence regarding to this thread ;). Off cause, I'll read any replies, but i've got nothing additional to write regarding to this topic myself. Thanks for the discussion to everybody. Regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308070429.2218.269.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 18:29 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:10 +, Camaleón wrote: > [snip] > > Ok, perhaps you don't have the tools to measure the load, so I won't ask > you to do it, but ... > > Have you ever compared temperature and battery life when switching > between ondemand and performance? > > How much is the difference on your machine? > > For the machines I know there's quasi no difference for he temperature > and the measured watt, those machines don't use batteries, but watt > gives information about battery duration. > > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:15 +, Camaleón wrote: > > On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:02:40 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > > > Why not using ondemand set by the kernel's default governor? > > > > Because then you will force users to recompile the kernel > > Why recompiling the kernel? Why not setting the default governor to > ondemand. I bet it's already set to ondemand. > > For me it is > > spinymouse@debian:/boot$ cat config-2.6.39.1 | grep > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE is not set > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set > CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND=y > # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE is not set > > I bet for you it is already set to ondemand. > > If so, why adding the script? OT: Strange, my kernel should be set to performance, I need to check if anything else isn't set correctly :(. I used the config of the kernel-rt I used before + make oldconfig, so that it was command out for my script isn't important: cp /boot/config-$(uname -r) .config #echo "CONFIG_STAGING=n" >> .config #echo "CONFIG_RT_GROUP_SCHED=n" >> .config #echo "CONFIG_DEBUG_INFO=n" >> .config #echo "CONFIG_DEBUG_KERNEL=n" >> .config #echo "CONFIG_FTRACE=n" >> .config #echo "CONFIG_PREEMPT_RT=y" >> .config #echo "CONFIG_HZ_1000=y" >> .config Strange! *lol* Anyway, other users already have kernel-rt were the GOV is set to performance. So regarding to the used kernel the GOV could be set and then, without any script everybody would be satisfied. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308069670.2218.262.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
Sorry, re-sending to list - gmail doesn't reply-to on debian-user properly. On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 00:33, Jimmy Wu wrote: > On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 00:29, Ralf Mardorf > wrote: >> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:15 +, Camaleón wrote: >>> On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:02:40 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >>> >>> > Why not using ondemand set by the kernel's default governor? >>> >>> Because then you will force users to recompile the kernel >> >> Why recompiling the kernel? Why not setting the default governor to >> ondemand. I bet it's already set to ondemand. > > [snip] > >> I bet for you it is already set to ondemand. >> >> If so, why adding the script? > > I assume that is so people who want something else will be able to > change it without needing to recompile the kernel. > -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/banlktikpbtyzaf+uh7m8y+wogug7ze2...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:10 +, Camaleón wrote: [snip] Ok, perhaps you don't have the tools to measure the load, so I won't ask you to do it, but ... Have you ever compared temperature and battery life when switching between ondemand and performance? How much is the difference on your machine? For the machines I know there's quasi no difference for he temperature and the measured watt, those machines don't use batteries, but watt gives information about battery duration. On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:15 +, Camaleón wrote: > On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:02:40 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > > Why not using ondemand set by the kernel's default governor? > > Because then you will force users to recompile the kernel Why recompiling the kernel? Why not setting the default governor to ondemand. I bet it's already set to ondemand. For me it is spinymouse@debian:/boot$ cat config-2.6.39.1 | grep CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_PERFORMANCE is not set # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_USERSPACE is not set CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_ONDEMAND=y # CONFIG_CPU_FREQ_DEFAULT_GOV_CONSERVATIVE is not set I bet for you it is already set to ondemand. If so, why adding the script? -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308068976.2218.253.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 18:02:40 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > Why not using ondemand set by the kernel's default governor? Because then you will force users to recompile the kernel in order they can change it. And that's simply silly. Didn't you want a sytem without hassle? > My desktop kernels are compiled to set it to ondemand and my audio > kernels are compiled to set it to performance. Why does Debian add such > a Windows like folderol script at startup? The default kernel already > could set the governor to ondemand, so the needs for every user are > satisfied. Again, hard-coding that value would be the worst policy a distribution can follow. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.14.16.15...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 17:51:51 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 14:54 +, Camaleón wrote: >> > Is there any CPU where CPU frequency scaling really makes a >> > difference for load? >> >> Define "load" in your context. > > 'Load' should be for 'ampere' > > Ampere = Volt / Resistance > Watt = Volt * Ampere > > Caused heat and battery durability depends to the load. The same effect has a higher frequency cycle for the CPU. > Since there's nearly no difference between a fast and a slowed down CPU, > for the 'load', it won't effect heat and battery durability very much. But the load is just another parameter that needs to be measured, in join with CPU throttling. Isolating both values makes no sense when it comes to power management. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.14.16.10...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 16:29 +0100, Darac Marjal wrote: > On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 04:16:38PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:53 +, Camaleón wrote: > > > > > [cut] > > > > > It's not about "load" but "frequency speed" and my micro reduces its > > > cycles from 2.8 Ghz. (normal run) to 2.0 Ghz (idle+ondemad) which I > > > prefer. Why wasting cpu cycles and increasing the heat of the whole > > > system if I don't really need all that power all the time? > > > > There's no big difference for the load and the load will cause the heat. > > I'm using the GNOME applet anyway. Before users run into issues > > 'performance' as default for everybody would be the better choice. > > > > Is there any CPU where CPU frequency scaling really makes a difference > > for load? > > Just about any processor in a mobile context (laptop, smartphone etc) > can benefit from reducing CPU frequency. Each clock cycle requires work, > even if the CPU is not doing anything productive (i.e. it's idle). So > fewer clock cycles means longer battery life. > > In terms of load as in load average, decreasing clock frequency should > actually increase the load (you have the same amount of work to be done, > but less computational power available to do the work). > I asked if there's any CPU where ondemand will safe load. How much less Watt does your CPU need when using CPU frequency scaling? I bet it will be marginal, irrelevant regarding to battery life and produced heat. Why not using ondemand set by the kernel's default governor? My desktop kernels are compiled to set it to ondemand and my audio kernels are compiled to set it to performance. Why does Debian add such a Windows like folderol script at startup? The default kernel already could set the governor to ondemand, so the needs for every user are satisfied. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308067360.2218.234.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 15:55 +0100, Lisi wrote: > On Tuesday 14 June 2011 15:16:38 Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > And there are billions of users who tried to switch from Windows to > > Linux just regarding to ethical reasons or better software regarding to > > their needs and they all need to use Windows, because the Linux > > community don't care about people who only wish to use a tool like > > Linux. > > Ubuntu is part of the Linux community, as is OpenSUSE, as is I understand > Mandriva, as are several netbook OSes (e.g. Linpus Lite ), as > is. > > But Debian has made a policy decision to have only free software in its main > repository. Moreover, I would say that on the whole Debian appeals to people > who like to tinker, and do not like being told, in a manner that I at least > find patronising, what to do. > > Many people do not like Debian's philosophy and do not use Debian. That > choice is open to you as to everyone else. If you are using Debian, you must > have made a conscious choice to do so. If you now find that you don't like > its philosophy, then by all means change to a distro whose philosophy chimes > with yours. > > Lisi OpenSuse and Ubuntu are on my machine too, there things are much more worse than for Debian. Much more folderol as there is for Debian. I wonder that for Debian there still is folderol as this odd script. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308066984.2218.229.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 14:54 +, Camaleón wrote: > > Is there any CPU where CPU frequency scaling really makes a difference > > for load? > > Define "load" in your context. 'Load' should be for 'ampere' Ampere = Volt / Resistance Watt = Volt * Ampere Caused heat and battery durability depends to the load. Since there's nearly no difference between a fast and a slowed down CPU, for the 'load', it won't effect heat and battery durability very much. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308066711.2218.225.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 04:16:38PM +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:53 +, Camaleón wrote: > > [cut] > > > It's not about "load" but "frequency speed" and my micro reduces its > > cycles from 2.8 Ghz. (normal run) to 2.0 Ghz (idle+ondemad) which I > > prefer. Why wasting cpu cycles and increasing the heat of the whole > > system if I don't really need all that power all the time? > > There's no big difference for the load and the load will cause the heat. > I'm using the GNOME applet anyway. Before users run into issues > 'performance' as default for everybody would be the better choice. > > Is there any CPU where CPU frequency scaling really makes a difference > for load? Just about any processor in a mobile context (laptop, smartphone etc) can benefit from reducing CPU frequency. Each clock cycle requires work, even if the CPU is not doing anything productive (i.e. it's idle). So fewer clock cycles means longer battery life. In terms of load as in load average, decreasing clock frequency should actually increase the load (you have the same amount of work to be done, but less computational power available to do the work). -- Paul Saunders signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tuesday 14 June 2011 15:16:38 Ralf Mardorf wrote: > And there are billions of users who tried to switch from Windows to > Linux just regarding to ethical reasons or better software regarding to > their needs and they all need to use Windows, because the Linux > community don't care about people who only wish to use a tool like > Linux. Ubuntu is part of the Linux community, as is OpenSUSE, as is I understand Mandriva, as are several netbook OSes (e.g. Linpus Lite ), as is. But Debian has made a policy decision to have only free software in its main repository. Moreover, I would say that on the whole Debian appeals to people who like to tinker, and do not like being told, in a manner that I at least find patronising, what to do. Many people do not like Debian's philosophy and do not use Debian. That choice is open to you as to everyone else. If you are using Debian, you must have made a conscious choice to do so. If you now find that you don't like its philosophy, then by all means change to a distro whose philosophy chimes with yours. Lisi -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/201106141555.53293.lisi.re...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 16:16:38 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:53 +, Camaleón wrote:
>
>> But that's a known issue, right? Or at least is not different from
>> other problems that any user which requires a specific/fine grained
>> setup or tweaks may experience.
>
> Yes and yes.
>
>> But then you are enforcing a cpu frequency policy that can cause
>> problems to the majority of the users... are you suggesting that?
>
> What kind of problems?
With todays clock speeds you may care about overheating. While you can
expect servers to be usually well cooled you may be more cautious when it
comes to desktops and notebooks. And having the latter always running to
their highest clock speed can lead you to unforeseen restarts.
>> > Yes, but not everybody knows about CPU frequency scaling and those
>> > issues, so you'll read about mysterious audible glitches for the
>> > audio signal all the time on audio mailing lists.
>>
>> Err, if that's the only annoyance, have you ever considered to write a
>> page in the Debian wiki and pointing users to there? :-)
>
> No, perhaps a good idea, anyway, I suspect that users won't read
> billions of manuals, Wikies etc..
If a user is instructed to read a documment but he/she refuses to do it
(because of laziness or whatever excuse they give) then it's up to them.
Users have to read, being linux or windows users, we cannot expect all of
our problems being automatically solved without moving a finger... err, I
mean, an eye :-)
>> It's not about "load" but "frequency speed" and my micro reduces its
>> cycles from 2.8 Ghz. (normal run) to 2.0 Ghz (idle+ondemad) which I
>> prefer. Why wasting cpu cycles and increasing the heat of the whole
>> system if I don't really need all that power all the time?
>
> There's no big difference for the load and the load will cause the heat.
> I'm using the GNOME applet anyway. Before users run into issues
> 'performance' as default for everybody would be the better choice.
Why "better"? :-)
A mobile user may prefer to have a more conservative scaling frequency
and neither "ondemand" nor "performace" governor is "better" for him.
> Is there any CPU where CPU frequency scaling really makes a difference
> for load?
Define "load" in your context. Choosing a CPU frequency is a user issue,
what is fine with me it can be bad for you so the default setting has to
be the more fair and that's "ondemand" ("powersave" and "performance" are
the more agressive profiles).
>> Well, not at all. The moral of the story was that most of the linux
>> users like to know what are they doing, they like digging into their
>> system's guts and enjoy learning while windows users are more
>> accostumed to things work "magically" :-)
>
> And there are billions of users who tried to switch from Windows to
> Linux just regarding to ethical reasons or better software regarding to
> their needs and they all need to use Windows, because the Linux
> community don't care about people who only wish to use a tool like
> Linux.
Saying that is a bit unfair >:-)
You said "hey, let's make users to compile their own kernel" but reject a
default policy that can be easily modified? Who is the one that now
doesn't "care about people who only wish to use a tool like Linux"?
Greetings,
--
Camaleón
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.14.14.54...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 13:53 +, Camaleón wrote: > But that's a known issue, right? Or at least is not different from other > problems that any user which requires a specific/fine grained setup or > tweaks may experience. Yes and yes. > But then you are enforcing a cpu frequency policy that can cause problems > to the majority of the users... are you suggesting that? What kind of problems? > > Yes, but not everybody knows about CPU frequency scaling and those > > issues, so you'll read about mysterious audible glitches for the audio > > signal all the time on audio mailing lists. > > Err, if that's the only annoyance, have you ever considered to write a > page in the Debian wiki and pointing users to there? :-) No, perhaps a good idea, anyway, I suspect that users won't read billions of manuals, Wikies etc.. > It's not about "load" but "frequency speed" and my micro reduces its > cycles from 2.8 Ghz. (normal run) to 2.0 Ghz (idle+ondemad) which I > prefer. Why wasting cpu cycles and increasing the heat of the whole > system if I don't really need all that power all the time? There's no big difference for the load and the load will cause the heat. I'm using the GNOME applet anyway. Before users run into issues 'performance' as default for everybody would be the better choice. Is there any CPU where CPU frequency scaling really makes a difference for load? > Well, not at all. The moral of the story was that most of the linux users > like to know what are they doing, they like digging into their system's > guts and enjoy learning while windows users are more accostumed to things > work "magically" :-) And there are billions of users who tried to switch from Windows to Linux just regarding to ethical reasons or better software regarding to their needs and they all need to use Windows, because the Linux community don't care about people who only wish to use a tool like Linux. Regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308060998.2218.169.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Tue, 14 Jun 2011 15:23:16 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 13:28 +, Camaleón wrote: >> > - Inexperienced people get 'mysterious' xruns using jackd. >> >> I don't undertsand this. Can you expand this a bit for neophytes? :-) > > If you install jackd and try to make music without a real-time capable > kernel or with CPU ferquency scaling set to performance you'll get > audible glitches. Ah, ok. But that's a known issue, right? Or at least is not different from other problems that any user which requires a specific/fine grained setup or tweaks may experience. >> here we only have one main kernel, so do you think the >> default settings should make happy to just 20% of the users? >> >> I prefer a default setting to be "user-wise" and then have the >> possibility to easily change that default configuration at my wish. > > You can add such a script if wanted yourself and the kernels default > could be set to 'ondemand', hence no script is needed. But then you are enforcing a cpu frequency policy that can cause problems to the majority of the users... are you suggesting that? > At the moment people need to use a kernel-rt for audio productions, > hences this kernel could be set to 'performance'. Or a prebuild tweaked kernel package ready to be installed easily, like openSUSE has. >> > - I run audio sessions by shell scripts, hence I can set the governor >> > to >> > performance, while it's ok when it's set to ondemand for non-audio >> > usage. >> >> But you can easily tweak that value or even disable it, right? > > Yes, but not everybody knows about CPU frequency scaling and those > issues, so you'll read about mysterious audible glitches for the audio > signal all the time on audio mailing lists. Err, if that's the only annoyance, have you ever considered to write a page in the Debian wiki and pointing users to there? :-) >> > - Why not making a Debian that OOTB fit to most needs, even for >> > people >> > who don't wish to read [fine] manuals and to learn how to program. >> >> Having a value for cpufreq different than "ondemand" will nto make any >> favour to the vast majority of computers. The exception cannot be the >> norm :-) > > 'ondemand' is nearly useless, you won't reduce the load very much, it's > around 1 W, nothing regarding to the CPU's load of 40, 50, 60 W and > higher. It's not about "load" but "frequency speed" and my micro reduces its cycles from 2.8 Ghz. (normal run) to 2.0 Ghz (idle+ondemad) which I prefer. Why wasting cpu cycles and increasing the heat of the whole system if I don't really need all that power all the time? >> I hope you've understood that in the above metaphor Windows is the >> "megastore" and Linux is the "cutlery shop" ;-) > > So Linux is not for intuitive users, for nerds only ;)? Well, not at all. The moral of the story was that most of the linux users like to know what are they doing, they like digging into their system's guts and enjoy learning while windows users are more accostumed to things work "magically" :-) > OT: Btw. 2.6.39.1 don't need a rt-patch anymore. Good. > I installed the outdated proprietary nvidia driver, since there's no > package for the installer, for the current one, but I guess there's the > current proprietary driver for the 'regular' Debian kernel provided by a > package. I might be mistaken. If not I wonder why Debian make things > harder than there's the need to do. Nvidia (and ati) closed source package is a bit oudated from debian non- oss but you can always go to nvidia site and get the latest driver from there. > So I'll stay at the outdated one or need to do anything manually, which > is time consuming, because I already had to build ALSA myself, rt > capable kernels etc.. Debian seems to be one of those multimedia > unfriendly distros, while we are living in a multimedia world. All > kinds of flashy trash seems to be available, such as 3D desktops etc.. Debian is a multi-purpose distribution, focused to desktops, workstatiosn, servers, embedded systems, etc... you can't get all of your users happy :-). You just have to consider if benefits have more weight than deficiencies. Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.14.13.53...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Mon, 2011-06-13 at 13:28 +, Camaleón wrote: > > - Inexperienced people get 'mysterious' xruns using jackd. > > I don't undertsand this. Can you expand this a bit for neophytes? :-) If you install jackd and try to make music without a real-time capable kernel or with CPU ferquency scaling set to performance you'll get audible glitches. > here we only have one main kernel, so do you think the > default settings should make happy to just 20% of the users? > > I prefer a default setting to be "user-wise" and then have the > possibility to easily change that default configuration at my wish. You can add such a script if wanted yourself and the kernels default could be set to 'ondemand', hence no script is needed. At the moment people need to use a kernel-rt for audio productions, hences this kernel could be set to 'performance'. > > - I run audio sessions by shell scripts, hence I can set the governor to > > performance, while it's ok when it's set to ondemand for non-audio > > usage. > > But you can easily tweak that value or even disable it, right? Yes, but not everybody knows about CPU frequency scaling and those issues, so you'll read about mysterious audible glitches for the audio signal all the time on audio mailing lists. > > - Why not making a Debian that OOTB fit to most needs, even for people > > who don't wish to read [fine] manuals and to learn how to program. > > Having a value for cpufreq different than "ondemand" will nto make any > favour to the vast majority of computers. The exception cannot be the > norm :-) 'ondemand' is nearly useless, you won't reduce the load very much, it's around 1 W, nothing regarding to the CPU's load of 40, 50, 60 W and higher. > I hope you've understood that in the above metaphor Windows is the > "megastore" and Linux is the "cutlery shop" ;-) So Linux is not for intuitive users, for nerds only ;)? OT: Btw. 2.6.39.1 don't need a rt-patch anymore. I installed the outdated proprietary nvidia driver, since there's no package for the installer, for the current one, but I guess there's the current proprietary driver for the 'regular' Debian kernel provided by a package. I might be mistaken. If not I wonder why Debian make things harder than there's the need to do. So I'll stay at the outdated one or need to do anything manually, which is time consuming, because I already had to build ALSA myself, rt capable kernels etc.. Debian seems to be one of those multimedia unfriendly distros, while we are living in a multimedia world. All kinds of flashy trash seems to be available, such as 3D desktops etc.. Regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1308057796.2218.137.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Du, 12 iun 11, 17:35:02, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > - This can be done without this script. What is the kernel config for? For those who don't ever compile their kernel. I assume these are the most. Regards, Andrei -- Offtopic discussions among Debian users and developers: http://lists.alioth.debian.org/mailman/listinfo/d-community-offtopic signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 17:35:02 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 13:35 +, Camaleón wrote: >> On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:23:16 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: >> >> (not sure if this post was targeted to this mailing list...) >> >> (...) >> >> > anyway, this is idiocy, hence the default can be set by the kernel. >> > For the kernel-generic-default-office-non-real-time a distro could >> > chose 'ondemand'. This script is nonsense and only cause that once a >> > month somebody send a request regarding to xruns when using jackd. >> >> What's the problem here? What kind of annoyance are you having with >> that script? I find it very convenient, it allows you to: >> >> 1/ Completely remove/disable it from starting in an easy manner 2/ >> Tweaking the cpu scaling without much headache >> >> What more do you need? :-) >> >> Greetings, > > > - This can be done without this script. What is the kernel config for? And you prefer that people have to recompile the kernel to tweak that setting? :-? > - Inexperienced people get 'mysterious' xruns using jackd. I don't undertsand this. Can you expand this a bit for neophytes? :-) > - Inexperienced people willing to 'read the [fine] manual' anyway don't > know what they need to read, especially when thy think jackd is buggy. But not all users are using jackd and there has to be a default setting that best fits to as many users as possible :-) In this regard, I know in other distributions (e.g., openSUSE) there are different kernels with different settings preset that affect to sound applications (like PulseAudio) aimed to desktop (-desktop) and servers (- default) but here we only have one main kernel, so do you think the default settings should make happy to just 20% of the users? I prefer a default setting to be "user-wise" and then have the possibility to easily change that default configuration at my wish. > - I run audio sessions by shell scripts, hence I can set the governor to > performance, while it's ok when it's set to ondemand for non-audio > usage. But you can easily tweak that value or even disable it, right? > - Why not making a Debian that OOTB fit to most needs, even for people > who don't wish to read [fine] manuals and to learn how to program. Having a value for cpufreq different than "ondemand" will nto make any favour to the vast majority of computers. The exception cannot be the norm :-) > - When I get a knife, I know how to use it, but I don't know how to make > a knife and I don't want to learn how to make a knife, it should be > already edged. I won't RTFM about knives. There are many advantadges in knowing how a knife is made or what type of knifes there are. If you are not interested on it, well, that's fine, but then you should go to a megastore to buy it one (no one in there will ask you specific question about how are you going to use the knife) instead of a specialized cutlery shop (where you will be asked many question in order to get the right item for you). I hope you've understood that in the above metaphor Windows is the "megastore" and Linux is the "cutlery shop" ;-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.13.13.28...@gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Sun 12 Jun 2011 at 17:35:02 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > - I run audio sessions by shell scripts, hence I can set the governor to > performance, while it's ok when it's set to ondemand for non-audio > usage. Some choices: 1. File a bug report. But read bug #461470 first. 2. Install gnome-applets. 3. Read section 3.3 of OLS2006-ondemand-paper.pdf at ftp://ftp.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/lenb/acpi/doc/O -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20110612165217.GZ19914@desktop
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Sun, Jun 12, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > - Why not making a Debian that OOTB fit to most needs, even for people > who don't wish to read [fine] manuals and to learn how to program. Maybe the developers decided that the current setting's the one that fits most needs. If you feel this strongly, perhaps you could contact the developers - but calling their decision idiotic isn't the best way forward (I'd certainly ignore any email that you'd send me!). -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/banlktikz76zemmt4o+mziben1psgst-...@mail.gmail.com
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 13:35 +, Camaleón wrote: > On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:23:16 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > (not sure if this post was targeted to this mailing list...) > > (...) > > > anyway, this is idiocy, hence the default can be set by the kernel. For > > the kernel-generic-default-office-non-real-time a distro could chose > > 'ondemand'. This script is nonsense and only cause that once a month > > somebody send a request regarding to xruns when using jackd. > > What's the problem here? What kind of annoyance are you having with that > script? I find it very convenient, it allows you to: > > 1/ Completely remove/disable it from starting in an easy manner > 2/ Tweaking the cpu scaling without much headache > > What more do you need? :-) > > Greetings, - This can be done without this script. What is the kernel config for? - Inexperienced people get 'mysterious' xruns using jackd. - Inexperienced people willing to 'read the [fine] manual' anyway don't know what they need to read, especially when thy think jackd is buggy. - I run audio sessions by shell scripts, hence I can set the governor to performance, while it's ok when it's set to ondemand for non-audio usage. - Why not making a Debian that OOTB fit to most needs, even for people who don't wish to read [fine] manuals and to learn how to program. - When I get a knife, I know how to use it, but I don't know how to make a knife and I don't want to learn how to make a knife, it should be already edged. I won't RTFM about knives. 2 Cents, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1307892902.2416.178.camel@debian
Re: Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
On Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:23:16 +0200, Ralf Mardorf wrote: (not sure if this post was targeted to this mailing list...) (...) > anyway, this is idiocy, hence the default can be set by the kernel. For > the kernel-generic-default-office-non-real-time a distro could chose > 'ondemand'. This script is nonsense and only cause that once a month > somebody send a request regarding to xruns when using jackd. What's the problem here? What kind of annoyance are you having with that script? I find it very convenient, it allows you to: 1/ Completely remove/disable it from starting in an easy manner 2/ Tweaking the cpu scaling without much headache What more do you need? :-) Greetings, -- Camaleón -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/pan.2011.06.12.13.35...@gmail.com
Is there any valid reason to add an idiotic script to /etc/init.d by an default Debian install that only cause a PITA?
Forwarded Message From: Ralf Mardorf To: linux-audio-u...@lists.linuxaudio.org Subject: Re: [LAU] Jack vs. Alsa, PianoTeq demo: Alsa wins! Date: Sun, 12 Jun 2011 12:15:20 +0200 On Sun, 2011-06-12 at 11:59 +0200, [...] wrote: > On 06/12/2011 11:44 AM, Ralf Mardorf wrote: > > What CPU frequency scaling? Is it set to performance? There's a new > > nuisance for GNOME desktops on Ubuntu and Debian, they ignore the > > kernel's default CPU frequency scaling, they switch from 'performance' > > to 'ondemand' for GNOME sessions. > > apt-file search ondemand | grep init.d > initscripts: /etc/init.d/ondemand > > So at least on Ubuntu the ondemand init script is part of the > initscripts package and has nothing to do with Gnome. > > Best, > > Jeremy Thank you :) On Debian it's $ cat /etc/init.d/cpufrequtils #!/bin/sh [snip] GOVERNOR="ondemand" [snip] anyway, this is idiocy, hence the default can be set by the kernel. For the kernel-generic-default-office-non-real-time a distro could chose 'ondemand'. This script is nonsense and only cause that once a month somebody send a request regarding to xruns when using jackd. Regards, Ralf -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/1307874196.2416.53.camel@debian
