Matthias Weber wrote:
How do I count the number of runs? I mean, do I have to count, or does
it tell me somewhere so that I can look it up?
texexec reports it
The log files are lengthy, maybe the memory usage is of interest:
Run A:
12246 strings out of 64833
221604 string characters out of 691267
Adam Lindsay wrote:
Matthias Weber said this at Fri, 4 Mar 2005 13:35:13 -0500:
Were both runs from the same point--were they "virgin" runs?
Did you precede the texexec command with a "texutil --purgeall"
command,
for example?
--
My TeX source file is a single file with images. Most of the TeX-
Steffen Wolfrum wrote:
"texutil.pl" is untouched.
I guess Hans is still verifying this perl hassle?
i changed it, not sure if i uploaded that version; the problem is that i'm now
on too slow lines; next week i'm at
eurotex 2005
i'll see if i can use the adsl line there for uploading.
Hans
-
Matthias Weber <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
after the recent discussion of ConTeXt processing (some) files 4 times
as often under OS X
than elsewhere, I decided to upgrade to the most recent beta and run a
speed comparison
on notes I am writing. To my dismay, here are the results:
Old v
Matthias Weber said this at Fri, 4 Mar 2005 13:35:13 -0500:
>> Were both runs from the same point--were they "virgin" runs?
>> Did you precede the texexec command with a "texutil --purgeall"
>> command,
>> for example?
>> --
>>
>
>
>My TeX source file is a single file with images. Most of the Te
On Mar 4, 2005, at 12:24 PM, Hans Hagen wrote:
Matthias Weber wrote:
Hello,
after the recent discussion of ConTeXt processing (some) files 4
times as often under OS X
than elsewhere, I decided to upgrade to the most recent beta and run
a speed comparison
on notes I am writing. To my dismay, here
On Mar 4, 2005, at 12:20 PM, Adam Lindsay wrote:
Matthias Weber said this at Fri, 4 Mar 2005 12:13:50 -0500:
Old version:
ConTeXt ver: 2004.11.23 fmt: 2004.12.16
TeXExec 5.2.3
total run time : 324 seconds
New version:
ConTeXt ver: 2005.03.02 fmt: 2005.3.4
total run time : 416 seconds
And I was
Matthias Weber wrote:
Hello,
after the recent discussion of ConTeXt processing (some) files 4 times
as often under OS X
than elsewhere, I decided to upgrade to the most recent beta and run a
speed comparison
on notes I am writing. To my dismay, here are the results:
Old version:
ConTeXt ver: 20
Matthias Weber said this at Fri, 4 Mar 2005 12:13:50 -0500:
>Old version:
>
>ConTeXt ver: 2004.11.23 fmt: 2004.12.16
>TeXExec 5.2.3
>
>total run time : 324 seconds
>
>
>New version:
>
>ConTeXt ver: 2005.03.02 fmt: 2005.3.4
> total run time : 416 seconds
>
>And I was hoping for a speed increas
Hello,
after the recent discussion of ConTeXt processing (some) files 4 times
as often under OS X
than elsewhere, I decided to upgrade to the most recent beta and run a
speed comparison
on notes I am writing. To my dismay, here are the results:
Old version:
ConTeXt ver: 2004.11.23 fmt: 2004.12
10 matches
Mail list logo
