On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 07:57:15AM +0100, NN_il_Confusionario wrote: > On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 10:40:20PM -0500, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: > 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.
There also seems to be a problem with the ideal of "provided that the ram is sufficient". A direct comparison would be with identical ram. I don't know how much ram Lenny's installer will need. Etch's needed more than 32 MB but 64 MB was barely adequate. I just installed Etch on a box with 96 MB, base install only, then ran top in one VT with aptitude in another. I noticed during package install that dpkg hits swap. At some point I'll put OpenBSD 4.4 on that box and see what happens with pkg_add. Doug. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
