Ciao :)
Alle 23:42, martedì 8 aprile 2003, Hendrik Sattler ha scritto:
>
> What's worse is that KDE still takes ages to start, independent on how fast
> the system is. KDM starts up fast (although it is still pretty slow), too,
> so somewhere must be a big problem in the startup routine. The whole
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:13:15PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Thursday 10 April 2003 14:34, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > xfree86 (4.3.0-0ds3v2) unstable; urgency=low
> > [...]
> > * debian/xfree86-common.init:
> > + Now automatically makes /tmp/.ICE-unix, and makes it root.root 1777.
> >
On Thursday 10 April 2003 14:34, Daniel Stone wrote:
> xfree86 (4.3.0-0ds3v2) unstable; urgency=low
> [...]
> * debian/xfree86-common.init:
> + Now automatically makes /tmp/.ICE-unix, and makes it root.root 1777.
> This increases KDE startup time dramatically. No, really.
patch: DEcrea
Hello,
It's getting Off Topic :)
* Yven Johannes Leist <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> (I really wonder why nobody else thought of getting rid, or least modifying
> the horribly annoying splashscreen before...)
You can do that as well with your debian packages (and probably with
every other versio
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 20:41, Gaute Hvoslef Kvalnes wrote:
[...]
> Sun didn't create StarOffice, they bought it from Star Division (a
> German company, I think), who developed it until version 5.2. Since
> then, it has really been made faster, but there's still a long way to
> go. If you compar
* Randy Kramer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And I keep getting confused -- did Star somehow acquire the old
> Wordstar? And incorporated parts of it in Star Office?
Nope: StarOffice was created by a guy from Germany some years back.
Something like the Compaq/HP garage thingie :). He founded
Sta
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:06:07PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 01:02:13PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> > I know. I run your packages! :)
> >
> > But Branden does the official version isn't it?
> >
> > Errr... who dares to send him an email? :)
>
> Well, Branden will
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 01:02:13PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> I know. I run your packages! :)
>
> But Branden does the official version isn't it?
>
> Errr... who dares to send him an email? :)
Well, Branden will be using my 4.3 debs as a base for his 4.3 debs. I'll
have a chat to him about
On Thursday 10 April 2003 11:26, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:56:13AM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> > On Thursday 10 April 2003 07:54, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > > Do you think that /etc/init.d/xfree86-common should create this? It
> > > > shouldn't be THAT difficult to have /
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:56:13AM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Thursday 10 April 2003 07:54, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Do you think that /etc/init.d/xfree86-common should create this? It
> > > shouldn't be THAT difficult to have /etc/init.d/xfree86-common look for
> > > configuration files
On Thursday 10 April 2003 07:54, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Do you think that /etc/init.d/xfree86-common should create this? It
> > shouldn't be THAT difficult to have /etc/init.d/xfree86-common look for
> > configuration files specifying which directories to create etc.
>
> I can't see why not, no
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 20:41, Gaute Hvoslef Kvalnes wrote:
> Sun didn't create StarOffice, they bought it from Star Division (a
> German company, I think), who developed it until version 5.2. Since
> then, it has really been made faster, but there's still a long way to
> go. If you compare it t
On Donnerstag, 10. April 2003 08:44, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 06:19:04PM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > I read that but it does not explain why the other method is 3-4 times
> > (!) slower. Especially, because the sockets in /tmp/.ICE-unix are
> > owned by me! So there must
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 06:19:04PM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> I read that but it does not explain why the other method is 3-4 times (!)
> slower. Especially, because the sockets in /tmp/.ICE-unix are owned by me!
> So there must be an if-then-else code somewhere that causes this behaviour.
>
On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 10:40:40AM +1000, Russell Coker wrote:
> Do you think that /etc/init.d/xfree86-common should create this? It
> shouldn't
> be THAT difficult to have /etc/init.d/xfree86-common look for configuration
> files specifying which directories to create etc.
I can't see why not
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 15:44, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:21:43PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote:
> > Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until
> > I can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133. Also, I get an error
> > when trying to chown root.root
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 02:41 pm, Gaute Hvoslef Kvalnes wrote:
> Sun didn't create StarOffice, they bought it from Star Division (a
> German company, I think), who developed it until version 5.2. Since
> then, it has really been made faster, but there's still a long way to
> go. If you compare i
Aryan Ameri <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> There was a time, when Sun was known for producing fast, secure and
> stable code. e.g back in mid 90s, everyone (even their competitors)
> agreed that Solaris was the best *nix ever. When in 2000 they
> announced their plan for staroffice/openoffice.Bor
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 18:19, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> I read that but it does not explain why the other method is 3-4 times (!)
> slower. Especially, because the sockets in /tmp/.ICE-unix are owned by me!
> So there must be an if-then-else code somewhere that causes this behaviour.
> I'm not s
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 16:46, Aryan Ameri wrote:
> > Yes... bad design, bloat, redundant code, all the horrors in one...
> > We use it at home because of the good support for MS office formats
> > though.
>
> Yup, actually OOo is the worst software, which I *have* to use everyday.
> Only for t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 07:44 schrieb Daniel Stone:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:21:43PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote:
> > Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until
> > I can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133.
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:03, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> > It's pretty simple - there's even a HOWTO around.
> Url?
Could be: http://dforce.sh.cvut.cz/~seli/download/tips.html
Cheers,
Mika
pgpvUidZtKby0.pgp
Description: signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 03:34 schrieb Daniel Stone:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 03:11:31AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> > I just tried the
> > chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix
> > /etc/init.d/kdm restart
> > and it really kicks it. Increadibl
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 08:11 schrieb Matt Sheffield:
> That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian
> deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix
> and all of the mcop and dcop directories ne
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 15:23, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:26, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > OOo is also ridiculous. It should share nore with the other
> > > available open source software - such as widgets. I'd be
> > > delighted to save my files with those gorgeous QT
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:19:28PM +0800, Cameron Patrick wrote:
> I've seen this problem before a few times, too. It applies to any
> landscape PDF file, and affects Ghostview as well as KGhostview and the
> Konqueror PDF plugin too.
>
> In fact I bumped into it this afternoon looking at uni cou
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:23:07PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
| > > KGhostview is still buggy. The first pdf my dad tried to open with it
| > > showed up sideways, off course the rest of the page in place. Grmbl...
| >
| > Did you report a bug? :)
|
| IIRC, the data was confidential.
I've see
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:23:07PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:26, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Well, I'm talking Australian dollars. There was a reason why I still had
> > the PII when I *maintained* KDE.
>
> Ugh... Must be painful to compile c++ code on such a box.
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:21:06PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:31, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Um, I'm not a "hardware is so cheap today" guy. I've spent most of the
> > thread pointing out why saying "hardware's cheap, go buy it" is a
> > ridiculous assertion.
>
> Wa
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:26, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 01:03:38PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> > On Wednesday 09 April 2003 11:56, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > Maybe in, say, DDR.
> >
> > 256 megs ddr = 80 euro. Reason my box has 256 meg :) I'll upgrade once I
> > have a ga
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 13:31, Daniel Stone wrote:
> Um, I'm not a "hardware is so cheap today" guy. I've spent most of the
> thread pointing out why saying "hardware's cheap, go buy it" is a
> ridiculous assertion.
Was still pointing at KL...
> > Yes I am talking about EDO ram of course! eve
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 12:15:13PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 April 2003 09:22, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Umm, it's still about $au60-80; people often don't have that money to
> > spare. My AthlonXP 2400+ is a direct upgrade from the PII 350, which I
> > had for ages.
>
> Oh gos
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 01:03:38PM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Wednesday 09 April 2003 11:56, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > Maybe in, say, DDR.
>
> 256 megs ddr = 80 euro. Reason my box has 256 meg :) I'll upgrade once I have
> a game that needs more for textures.
Well, I'm talking Australian d
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 11:56, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 11:10:05AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 09.22 skrev Daniel Stone:
> > > Not to mention 64mb.
> >
> > Well, where I live, 128MB appears to be the smallest size sold in common
> > shops.
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 09:22, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:50:29AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> > onsdagen den 9 april 2003 07.44 skrev Daniel Stone:
> > > 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure
> > > to be bandying around.
> >
> > Memory chips often comes in 128MB i
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 07:19, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> Which is why I say that for practical purposes, it appears that 256MB is a
> reasonable amount of RAM, in my opinion. Unless you run just only kmail +
> one instance of konqueror and noth more. Then 128MB might be allright.
> Which does
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 11:10:05AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> onsdagen den 9 april 2003 09.22 skrev Daniel Stone:
> > Not to mention 64mb.
>
> Well, where I live, 128MB appears to be the smallest size sold in common
> shops.
Maybe in, say, DDR.
> > The point is that your figures of 256m
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 09.22 skrev Daniel Stone:
> Not to mention 64mb.
Well, where I live, 128MB appears to be the smallest size sold in common
shops.
> The point is that your figures of 256mb are extremely irresponsible,
> considering users respect you somewhat for your packaging, and I'd
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Stone wrote:
|> I have edited /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh I haven't rebooted yet, so I
|> don't know if it works.
|
| Probably, but you're not getting rid of any stale files inside of
| .ICE-unix. :)
True. I could discard that and instead do the foll
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 09:09:54AM +0200, S?ren Friis-Nielsen wrote:
> I have edited /etc/init.d/bootmisc.sh
> About 40 lines down I added a line:
>
> ( cd /tmp && \
> ~ find . -xdev \
> ~ $TEXPR \
> ~ ! -name . \
> ~ ! \( -name lost+found -uid 0 \) \
> ~ ! \( -name quota.user -uid 0 \) \
> ~
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:22:51AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> The whole discussion was how much RAM is needed, and in my opinion, 128MB is
> too little. It works, but causes a lot of swapping with normal things like
> web browsing etc. The best and cheapest speed up for a 128MB system is
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:50:29AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> onsdagen den 9 april 2003 07.44 skrev Daniel Stone:
> > 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure
> > to be bandying around.
>
> Memory chips often comes in 128MB increments, don't they?
Not to mention 64mb.
> So the choice is
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:34:43AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> That might be. Which program is a good presentation tool? Some that
> graphically shows me what all the RAM is used for.
> I use it to get an approximate picture of what is going on. The individual
> numbers are not important,
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 02:11:27AM -0400, Matt Sheffield wrote:
> That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian
> deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix and
> all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time you start
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Matt Sheffield wrote:
| That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian
| deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the
.ICE-unix and
| all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time
you sta
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 08:22:51AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> The normal web browsers appears to be pretty bad, when it comes to memory.
> Just starting netscape/mozilla, will eat 75MB of RAM. Each instance of
> konqueror takes around 10MB extra. They also causes X to allocate more
> mem
On Wed, 9 Apr 2003 04:11 pm, Matt Sheffield wrote:
> That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian
> deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix
> ...
> time. I'd like to disable /tmp clearing and clean things up myself. How
> does one go abou
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 07.44 skrev Daniel Stone:
> 256mb of RAM is an irresponsible figure
> to be bandying around.
Memory chips often comes in 128MB increments, don't they?
So the choice is between 128 or 256. My recommendation is to get that 256. The
cost is not great nowadays. 128Mb is abo
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 00.25 skrev Andreas Pakulat:
> What are you all doing? kdeinit has 58Megs here, running. And I don't
> think that gmemusage is a good presentation tool, it shows me that:
> xmms(178XXXK) + galeon-bin(218232K) + python2.1(144408K) = 540 Megs.
> Which is what I got totally
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 03:34, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > I just tried the
> > chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix
> > /etc/init.d/kdm restart
> > and it really kicks it. Increadible but this this reduces the KDE startup
> > time to 1/3. Maybe there are other tweaks. I will go on trying, maybe
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 00.32 skrev kosh:
> X memory usage is evil black magic to figure out.
> It also includes AGP mapped memory, pixmaps and stuff that programs have
> open get charged to X and damned if I know how much other stuff it has. At
> one point I had X showing it was using 1G of ram
That method has improved performance for me. However by default, Debian
deletes the contents of the /tmp directory on reboot. Thus, the .ICE-unix and
all of the mcop and dcop directories need to be recreated each time you start
your machine up from scratch. But once these things have been set up
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 00:32, kosh wrote:
> X memory usage is evil black magic to figure out.
X is evil! Use fresco! - http://www.fresco.org
--
This email was generated using KMail from KDE 3.1 on Debian GNU/Linux
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:21:43PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote:
> Here is the scoop. I added 32 more MBs of memory for the time being until I
> can go to town and pick up a stick of SDRAM 133. Also, I get an error when
> trying to chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix. It says something about no such
> dire
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 07:19:06AM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> onsdagen den 9 april 2003 01.18 skrev Daniel Stone:
> > I thought you'd know that saying how much memory kdeinit takes is
> > *utterly* *useless*. Obviously not.
>
> It is not useless, as it says how much RAM is taken by KDE + s
be
a problem? Should I add it to bootmisc.sh as stated earlier? TIA!!
NeoFax
- Original Message -
From: "Daniel Stone" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Karolina Lindqvist" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Debian-KDE"
Sent: Tuesday, April 08, 2003 4:18 PM
Subje
onsdagen den 9 april 2003 01.18 skrev Daniel Stone:
> I thought you'd know that saying how much memory kdeinit takes is
> *utterly* *useless*. Obviously not.
It is not useless, as it says how much RAM is taken by KDE + some of the
applications. gmemusage just can't give a more find graded approa
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 03:11 schrieb Hendrik Sattler:
> I just tried the
> chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix
> /etc/init.d/kdm restart
> and it really kicks it. Increadible but this this reduces the KDE startup
> time to 1/3. Maybe there a
On Wed, Apr 09, 2003 at 03:11:31AM +0200, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> I just tried the
> chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix
> /etc/init.d/kdm restart
> and it really kicks it. Increadible but this this reduces the KDE startup
> time
> to 1/3. Maybe there are other tweaks. I will go on trying
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Mittwoch, 9. April 2003 00:47 schrieb Patrick Dreker:
> > What's worse is that KDE still takes ages to start, independent on how
> > fast the system is. KDM starts up fast (although it is still pretty
> > slow), too, so somewhere must be a big probl
On Wednesday 09 April 2003 00:47, Patrick Dreker wrote:
> Sure. top readings for memory have a history of being annoyingly easy to
> misunderstand (read: being wrong). IIRC these memory readings show all mem
> used by shared libs as belonging to the app, so these are displayed
> multiple times.
Is
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 10:23:46PM +0200, Karolina Lindqvist wrote:
> tisdagen den 8 april 2003 05.39 skrev Terry Milnes:
> > I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I am
> > logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown, but what
> > else can be cau
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Dienstag, 8. April 2003 23:42 schrieb Hendrik Sattler:
> Am Dienstag, 8. April 2003 23:08 schrieb Patrick Dreker:
> > The X memory usage includes AGP mem. So if your card has 32 meg of RAM
> > you have to subtract this first. My X reports 290 megs u
On Tuesday 08 April 2003 03:42 pm, Hendrik Sattler wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Am Dienstag, 8. April 2003 23:08 schrieb Patrick Dreker:
> > The X memory usage includes AGP mem. So if your card has 32 meg of RAM
> > you have to subtract this first. My X reports 290 m
On 08.Apr 2003 - 23:08:36, Patrick Dreker wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sorry, forgot to CC the mailing list...
>
> Am Dienstag, 8. April 2003 22:23 schrieb Karolina Lindqvist:
> > xfree86 115MB!
> > What is the X server doing with all that RAM?
> > Not, it is n
* Karolina Lindqvist schrieb am 08.04.03 um 22:23 Uhr:
> tisdagen den 8 april 2003 05.39 skrev Terry Milnes:
> > I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I am
> > logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown, but what
> > else can be causing it? Seco
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Am Dienstag, 8. April 2003 23:08 schrieb Patrick Dreker:
> The X memory usage includes AGP mem. So if your card has 32 meg of RAM you
> have to subtract this first. My X reports 290 megs used, but I have 128
> megs of that on my graphics board.
290-12
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Sorry, forgot to CC the mailing list...
Am Dienstag, 8. April 2003 22:23 schrieb Karolina Lindqvist:
> xfree86 115MB!
> What is the X server doing with all that RAM?
> Not, it is not a memory leak. I quitted xsane, and gqview, and it went down
> t
tisdagen den 8 april 2003 05.39 skrev Terry Milnes:
> I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I am
> logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown, but what
> else can be causing it? Secondly, how do I speed things up without
> installing more RAM?
From: "Casper Gielen" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Op dinsdag 8 april 2003 13:11, schreef Daniel Stone:
> > On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 12:53:27PM +0200, S?ren Friis-Nielsen wrote:
> > > Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > |>>>
> > > |>>> Try running 'chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix' when you log in.
> > >
> > > Is the
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Op dinsdag 8 april 2003 13:11, schreef Daniel Stone:
> On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 12:53:27PM +0200, S?ren Friis-Nielsen wrote:
> > Daniel Stone wrote:
> > |>>>
> > |>>> Try running 'chown root.root /tmp/.ICE-unix' when you log in.
> >
> > Is there a good
On Tuesday 08 April 2003 13:11, Daniel Stone wrote:
> I put it in the same /etc/init.d script that wipes out /tmp (sysmisc.sh
> or somesuch), but that feels kinda wrong. :)
Doesn't Debian set up /tmp/.X11-unix allready on boot? I wonder why that
script doesn't do that with ICE-unix.
--
Frank Va
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 12:53:27PM +0200, S?ren Friis-Nielsen wrote:
> Daniel Stone wrote:
> | I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used
> | up when I am logged in as user. I know that this could be
> | causing my slowdown, but what else can be causing it?
> | S
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Daniel Stone wrote:
| I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used
| up when I am logged in as user. I know that this could be
| causing my slowdown, but what else can be causing it?
| Secondly, how do I speed things up
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 11:30:05AM +0200, Frank Van Damme wrote:
> On Tuesday 08 April 2003 09:18, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > > I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I
> > > > am logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown,
> > > > but what else c
On Tuesday 08 April 2003 09:18, Daniel Stone wrote:
> > > I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I
> > > am logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown,
> > > but what else can be causing it? Secondly, how do I speed things up
> > > without instal
On Tue, Apr 08, 2003 at 04:55:06PM +1000, Daniel Stone wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 08:39:17PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote:
> > I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I am
> > logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown, but what
> > else can
On Mon, Apr 07, 2003 at 08:39:17PM -0700, Terry Milnes wrote:
> I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be completely used up when I am
> logged in as user. I know that this could be causing my slowdown, but what
> else can be causing it? Secondly, how do I speed things up without installing
I have 128MB of RAM and it seems to always be
completely used up when I am logged in as user. I know that this could be
causing my slowdown, but what else can be causing it? Secondly, how do I speed
things up without installing more RAM?
NeoFax
79 matches
Mail list logo
