> "Shankar" == Shankar Gopalakrishnan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Shankar> Hi all, Thanks for all the mail on how to get Lyx running
Shankar> well on a 486SX Model 56. As many of you suggested I got rid
Shankar> of KDE and ran LyX off FVWM; at first that didn't make any
Shankar> difference, b
Hi all,
Thanks for all the mail on how to get Lyx running well on a 486SX
Model 56. As many of you suggested I got rid of KDE and ran LyX off FVWM;
at first that didn't make any difference, but after I eliminated lpd,
sendmail and a few other daemons the system sped up a bit. I still
can
> Kde is a hog for resources.
>
> I've actually _seen_ with my own two eyes.
> Lyx running very ( acceptably anyway ) well on a 486-sx-80 --- or was it 75.
>
> We made sure that the kernel was compiled for a 486, did not have anything in it
> which was not actually needed to be able to use the m
On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, Shankar Gopalakrishnan wrote:
>Hey,
> I'm running Lyx 1.0.0 on an old IBM PS/2 Model 56, with Slackware
>kernel 2.0.35 modified for MCA, X, and KDE running. The machine has 16
>MB of RAM and 50 megs of swap space, a 486SX processor, and an XGA-2
>card with a 9524 monit
Hey,
I'm running Lyx 1.0.0 on an old IBM PS/2 Model 56, with Slackware
kernel 2.0.35 modified for MCA, X, and KDE running. The machine has 16
MB of RAM and 50 megs of swap space, a 486SX processor, and an XGA-2
card with a 9524 monitor. My problem is essentially that Lyx
runs a little to
