Apparently, though unproven, at 07:45 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Lie Ryan
did opine thusly:
> On 09/19/10 09:22, Hilco Wijbenga wrote:
> > On 18 September 2010 15:14, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> >> Is it just me? Or does Firefox get slower every release? And less
> >> stable.
> >
> > Indeed. Bu
Apparently, though unproven, at 00:28 on Sunday 19 September 2010, András
Csányi did opine thusly:
> On 19 September 2010 00:14, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> > Is it just me? Or does Firefox get slower every release? And less
> > stable.
> >
> > I got myself up to the latest, and I cannot install
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010, Florian
Philipp did opine thusly:
> Hi list!
>
> I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it eats memory for
> breakfast. Directly after booting, everything is okay but the usage
> grows significantly. I wonder whether t
On 09/18/2010 05:45 PM, Florian Philipp wrote:
Hi list!
I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it eats memory for
breakfast. Directly after booting, everything is okay but the usage
grows significantly. I wonder whether this is expected behavior.
The following statistics have been take
On 09/19/2010 11:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010, Florian
Philipp did opine thusly:
Hi list!
I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it eats memory for
breakfast. Directly after booting, everything is okay but the usage
gr
Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 07:45 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Lie Ryan
did opine thusly:
On 09/19/10 09:22, Hilco Wijbenga wrote:
On 18 September 2010 15:14, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
Is it just me? Or does Firefox get slower every release? And less
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 09/19/2010 11:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
Florian
Philipp did opine thusly:
Hi list!
I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it eats memory for
breakfast. Directly after booting, everythi
On 09/19/2010 12:15 PM, Dale wrote:
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 09/19/2010 11:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
Florian
Philipp did opine thusly:
Hi list!
I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it eats memory for
breakfa
On 19 September 2010 10:09, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 00:28 on Sunday 19 September 2010, András
> Csányi did opine thusly:
>
>> On 19 September 2010 00:14, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>> > Is it just me? Or does Firefox get slower every release? And less
>> > stable.
>> >
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 09/19/2010 12:15 PM, Dale wrote:
Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
On 09/19/2010 11:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
Florian
Philipp did opine thusly:
Hi list!
I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and
Apparently, though unproven, at 10:54 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Nikos
Chantziaras did opine thusly:
> On 09/19/2010 11:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
> > Florian
> >
> > Philipp did opine thusly:
> >> Hi list!
> >>
> >> I
On 09/19/2010 01:12 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 10:54 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Nikos
Chantziaras did opine thusly:
On 09/19/2010 11:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
Florian
Philipp did opine thusl
> free -m
> total used free shared buffers cached
> Mem: 3754 3588 165 0 57 258
3588 of 3754 is free, AFAIK not used at all. Plug off 3500 and sell it.
If your system is slow maybe from managing all that unusued memory. ;-)
Al
Al wrote:
free -m
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 3754 3588 165 0 57 258
3588 of 3754 is free, AFAIK not used at all. Plug off 3500 and sell it.
If your system is slow maybe from managing all that unusued memory. ;-)
Al
Act
Apparently, though unproven, at 12:37 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Al did
opine thusly:
> > free -m
> > total used free shared buffers cached
> > Mem: 3754 3588 165 0 57 258
>
> 3588 of 3754 is free, AFAIK not used at all. Plug off 3500 and sell it.
Alan McKinnon writes:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
> Florian Philipp did opine thusly:
> > I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it eats memory for
> > breakfast. Directly after booting, everything is okay but the usage
> > grows significantly.
Am 18.09.2010 22:19, schrieb Alex Schuster:
[...]
>
> I used to restart kdm once per day in order to free memory. If I did not
> do this, KDE4 became nearly unsusabe.
>
Yeah, logout - logon seems to resolve my problem temporarily, as well.
>
> Now this looks different here. I have X with 946M, pl
Am 19.09.2010 13:34, schrieb Alex Schuster:
> Alan McKinnon writes:
>> Like I posted in another thread today, the memory columns in top do not
>> mean what most people think they mean, nor are they simplistic.
>
> You gave the example of Thunderbird using 150M and Firefox 180M, but
> together the
Apparently, though unproven, at 13:34 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Alex
Schuster did opine thusly:
> Alan McKinnon writes:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 16:45 on Saturday 18 September 2010,
> >
> > Florian Philipp did opine thusly:
> > > I have a bit of a problem. I'm on KDE-4.4.5 and it e
Am 19.09.2010 10:25, schrieb Alan McKinnon:
[...]
> Like I posted in another thread today, the memory columns in top do not mean
> what most people think they mean, nor are they simplistic.
>
> The columns tell you the amount of memory that process can access. This is
> vitally important to unde
On Tuesday 14 September 2010 09:06:25 Petric Frank wrote:
> Hello Mick,
>
> Am Montag, 13. September 2010, 23:09:03 schrieb Mick:
> > Konqueror won't even go as far as that. It only shows:
> >
> > I [13/Sep/2010:22:04:57 +0100] [Job ???] Request file type is
> > application/pdf.
>
> In case of
I have tried changing resources in systemsettings to akonadi directory,
instead of .kde4/share/apps/kabc/std.vcf, but still cannot see any contacts.
When entering an address in a new message To: field, the address book seems to
be used because autocompletion works.
This is happening on both an
On Saturday 18 September 2010, Florian Philipp wrote:
>
> Okay, I'm used to Firefox taking much memory. I'm okay with that since
> it's the most heavily used application currently running. But why does
> Akregator need that much memory? It doesn't even have any tabs open at
> the moment and is jus
Hi all,
I'm not a mysql guru but what that bastard is doing it's drive me crazy.
version:5.1.50-r1 installed from portage
So...
I have installed and working fine.
I have installed phpmyadmin too and it's working fine. I can log in... :)
I wanted to create a database but after I gave the database
On 09/19/2010 08:05 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> This is of interest to those of us running old versions of Flash,
> especially on 64-bit installs without 32-bit support (looks in
> mirror).
>
> Download site is http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html
> To find out where to install, go
Mick [10-09-18 18:00]:
> On Saturday 18 September 2010 04:44:35 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> > KEYMAP="qwertz/de-latin1-nodeadkeys"
>
> Try changing this to:
>
> KEYMAP="de-latin1-nodeadkeys"
> --
> Regards,
> Mick
Unfortunately, this give me an QWERTY-keyboard layout (default).
Regards,
mcc
On Sunday 19 September 2010 16:06:06 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> Mick [10-09-18 18:00]:
> > On Saturday 18 September 2010 04:44:35 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> > > KEYMAP="qwertz/de-latin1-nodeadkeys"
> >
> > Try changing this to:
> >
> > KEYMAP="de-latin1-nodeadkeys"
>
> Unfortunately, this g
Mick [10-09-19 18:02]:
> On Sunday 19 September 2010 16:06:06 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> > Mick [10-09-18 18:00]:
> > > On Saturday 18 September 2010 04:44:35 meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> > > > KEYMAP="qwertz/de-latin1-nodeadkeys"
> > >
> > > Try changing this to:
> > >
> > > KEYMAP="de-latin
>
> Actually, the 3588 is what is used. The 165 is what is free. Maybe the
> email program you are using is not lining the columns up properly.
>
Maybe you are right. Headers out of alignment.
Al
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 3:02 AM, András Csányi wrote:
> On 19 September 2010 10:09, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 00:28 on Sunday 19 September 2010, András
> > Csányi did opine thusly:
> >
> >> On 19 September 2010 00:14, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> >> > Is it just me? Or
On Sat, Sep 18, 2010 at 1:13 AM, Albert Hopkins wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-09-17 at 18:23 -0700, Mark Knecht wrote:
> [...]
>> >>> Verifying ebuild manifests
>>
>> !!! Digest verification failed:
>> !!! /usr/portage/kde-base/ark/files/ark-4.4.5-cli7zip.patch
>> !!! Reason: Failed on RMD160 verification
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Daniel da Veiga
wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 03:21, Francesco Talamona
> wrote:
>> On Sunday 19 September 2010, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>>> Is it just me? Or does Firefox get slower every release? And less
>>> stable.
>>>
>>> I got myself up to the latest, and
ok first of .. i dont run my comp (laptop) for that long, although i am
planning to start using hibernate. its usually up the whole day though.
secondly im on kde4.5.1 (but i dont remeber having such bad memory problems
with the version your running).
Krunner's neopomuk plugin leaks memory, e
On Sunday 19 September 2010 18:07:11 me wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Daniel da Veiga
>
> wrote:
> > On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 03:21, Francesco Talamona
> >
> > wrote:
> >> On Sunday 19 September 2010, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
> >>> Is it just me? Or does Firefox get slower every releas
On 19 September 2010 19:18, Mick wrote:
>
> Opera is faster than FF for sure both on my amd64 and my x86. I tried Chrome
> once (early days then) and I couldn't tell if it was faster. I gave up on it
> because I was not sure if the browser was calling home with my browsing habits
> and if these
On 09/19/10 19:26, András Csányi wrote:
> On 19 September 2010 19:18, Mick wrote:
>>
>> Opera is faster than FF for sure both on my amd64 and my x86. I tried
Chrome
>> once (early days then) and I couldn't tell if it was faster. I gave up
on it
>> because I was not sure if the browser was calling
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Mick wrote:
> On Sunday 19 September 2010 18:07:11 me wrote:
>> On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Daniel da Veiga
>>
>> wrote:
>> > On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 03:21, Francesco Talamona
>> >
>> > wrote:
>> >> On Sunday 19 September 2010, Kevin O'Gorman wrote:
>> >>> I
Apparently, though unproven, at 19:02 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Mark Knecht
did opine thusly:
> In a related way I've never stopped to look at /usr in the process of
> doing an install. I have an old Mac Mini that I've been trying to get
> Gentoo running on recently so in the middle of my ins
Apparently, though unproven, at 18:32 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Kevin
O'Gorman did opine thusly:
> Yeah, me too. I teach at a university and classes start tomorrow. I've had
> the fox not starting as someone else did, then on upgrade it was sort of
> working, then not. The last bug I submitt
On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 19:02 on Sunday 19 September 2010, Mark Knecht
> did opine thusly:
>
>
>> In a related way I've never stopped to look at /usr in the process of
>> doing an install. I have an old Mac Mini that I've been trying
On Sunday 19 September 2010 18:56:36 me wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 1:18 PM, Mick wrote:
> > On Sunday 19 September 2010 18:07:11 me wrote:
> >> On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 2:42 AM, Daniel da Veiga
> >>
> >> wrote:
> >> > On Sun, Sep 19, 2010 at 03:21, Francesco Talamona
> >> >
> >> > wrote:
On Sun, 19 Sep 2010 02:05:51 -0400
Walter Dnes wrote:
> This is of interest to those of us running old versions of Flash,
> especially on 64-bit installs without 32-bit support (looks in
> mirror).
>
> Download site is http://labs.adobe.com/downloads/flashplayer10.html
> To find out where to
On Sunday 19 September 2010 18:26:56 András Csányi wrote:
> On 19 September 2010 19:18, Mick wrote:
> > Opera is faster than FF for sure both on my amd64 and my x86. I tried
> > Chrome once (early days then) and I couldn't tell if it was faster. I
> > gave up on it because I was not sure if the
On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 16:02 +0200, András Csányi wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm not a mysql guru but what that bastard is doing it's drive me crazy.
>
> version:5.1.50-r1 installed from portage
>
> So...
> I have installed and working fine.
> I have installed phpmyadmin too and it's working fine. I ca
Hi all. During a system update today, /usr/lib/libdbus-1.la was
deleted. However a number of packages require this file and now I can't
emerge any version of dbus with static-libs -- seems they have
hard-coded it away. What the heck is going on?
Any assistance would be appreciated.
--
Your li
On 09/20/10 02:33, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> Hi all. During a system update today, /usr/lib/libdbus-1.la was
> deleted. However a number of packages require this file and now I
> can't emerge any version of dbus with static-libs -- seems they
> have hard-coded it away. What the heck is going
a...@sourcegarden.de wrote:
> On 09/20/10 02:33, cov...@ccs.covici.com wrote:
> > Hi all. During a system update today, /usr/lib/libdbus-1.la was
> > deleted. However a number of packages require this file and now I
> > can't emerge any version of dbus with static-libs -- seems they
> > have har
maybe you need the "old-daemons" use flag?
On Fri, Sep 17, 2010 at 10:34 AM, Kyle Bader wrote:
> net-wireless/bluez maybe?
>
> Kyle
>
> On Sep 16, 2010 1:01 PM, "Hung Dang" wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I need to use hid2hci for my bluetooth keyboad. However, I could not figure
> out how to get the hi
Hi Guys,
I like amarok, I don't know why just I like it. Yesterday, when I
switched off amarok I saw the CPU using went down from ~40% to ~3% and
kwin from ~30% to ~1%.
the side effects of this, slower desktop and sometimes is
uncomfortable. My machine has 4GB RAM and nvidia (geforce 8400), but
th
On Mon, Sep 20, 2010 at 1:07 AM, me wrote:
> Chrome's set of extensions is growing rather large, and at least
> contains most of what anyone would need, a bit short of 'want', but
> covers needs fairly well. If you don't like chrome's interface I'll
> not argue, but if the extensions are the one t
On 19 September 2010 21:12, Albert Hopkins wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-09-19 at 16:02 +0200, András Csányi wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I'm not a mysql guru but what that bastard is doing it's drive me crazy.
>>
>> version:5.1.50-r1 installed from portage
>>
>> So...
>> I have installed and working fine.
>>
51 matches
Mail list logo
