On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:40:20PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
> down. At the time, OpenBSD was not UTF enabled and it ran much faster.
> I haven't checked the latest (4.4) which is UTF enabled to see if it has
> the same problem now.
my limited, un-scientific, console only, experience from a freshly
installed OpenBSD 4.4 in comparation with OpenBSD 3.x from woody's
times:
roughly same speed as OpenBSD 3.x, which means:
- faster than a FreBSD 7.1-BETA2 install (both BSD with their default shell;
FreeBSD became better with exec /usr/local/bin/mksh)
- *noticeably* slower than woody's /bin/bash
- faster than a /bin/bash install of etch
- slower than a etch install with
/bin/sh --> /bin/dash
SHELL=/bin/mksh
localepurge
/etc/inittab with only one getty, two login -f and one /bin/sash
(Note: even if I have tuned {Free,Open}BSD installs following the
handbook/faq and debian installs following my experience, I expect to be
able to do a much better tuning job on debian than on OpenBSD)
Surprisingly, from a very limited test on beige G3 mac machines (the
above tests were instead on a pentium mmx 200 machine), I expect that
lenny should NON be slower than etch or sarge (for console only use and
with the tunings above), provided that the ram (and disk space) is
sufficient.
When my time will permit, I will investigate the part of OpenBSD
compat_linux manpage about svgalib (I *need* dvisvga and bmv and I like
zgv and links2. Older tetex instead of texlive is not a problem for me,
but absence of a precompiled reasonably recent lilypond is)
--
Chi usa software non libero avvelena anche te. Digli di smettere.
Informatica=arsenico: minime dosi in rari casi patologici, altrimenti letale.
Informatica=bomba: intelligente solo per gli stupidi che ci credono.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
