On 06/10/02, 05:39:00PM -0500, David T-G wrote:
> John --
>
> ...and then John P Verel said...
> %
> % This may just be me, but it seems to me that 1.4 is considerably
> % "snappier" than 1.2.5 was. It's about 50K larger, and this is compiled
> % on this particular machine, versus rpm installed
John --
...and then John P Verel said...
%
% This may just be me, but it seems to me that 1.4 is considerably
% "snappier" than 1.2.5 was. It's about 50K larger, and this is compiled
% on this particular machine, versus rpm installed.
Who knows; it might still stand some stripping and get even
This may just be me, but it seems to me that 1.4 is considerably
"snappier" than 1.2.5 was. It's about 50K larger, and this is compiled
on this particular machine, versus rpm installed.
Does this make sense? Have others noticed this?
John
