[lkml]   [1998]   [Mar]   [12]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: 2.1.89 broken? Not for me!
In article <Pine.LNX.3.91.980310093615.12682A-100000@mirkwood.dummy.home>,
Rik van Riel <> writes:

>> > It works for me on my 233MMX, however it seems to be far
>> > less efficient than prior kernels when it comes to memory handling.

> (and I haven't heard you about worse performance either)

For me, 2.1.89 goes very well, unexpectadly well for a 2.1 kernel.
While all kernels before 2.1.7x simply hung after several hours, more
recent ones did work but at some moment they started to swap like mad
and became nearly unusable, .89 is working for a few days here and seems
OK. Several days uptme on a dual Pentium w/32M RAM, and now 16+ hours
on a 486 w/16M [keyboard port burned out on my new MB :-( ], with
loadaverage of 10 it is still quite usable (knocking the wood).

Eugene Crosser; 2:5020/230@fidonet;

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:41    [W:0.068 / U:12.636 seconds]
©2003-2018 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site