On Fri, Feb 06, 1998 at 10:26:48PM -0600, John Goerzen wrote: > On my P166 (64 meg RAM) it takes about 20 seconds. Strange, on a BSDi > P133 it takes about 5-10 seconds and that machine has less memory. I > suspect our Xemacs is loading a bunch of unneeded stuff but I don't > know for sure. You might want to mail our xemacs maintainer about this. > > Gerald Wann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > > Hi - > > > > I am experimenting with xemacs 20.3 on debian linux 2.0.29 machine > > w/ AMD K6 200MHz / 32M RAM. It takes xemacs about a full minute > > to load in xwindows. Anyone else experience such a prolonged load > > wait, or is it just me (& 20.3 ;-)?
Here is a tip someone posted - it reduced the time on my machine from 20 to 15 seconds. I flushed the disk cache between runs and ran the test several times. Adrian On Thu, Dec 18, 1997 at 10:00:58PM +0200, Heikki Vatiainen wrote: > Hi, > > If you are in a hurry do > touch /tmp/.sockets/audio0 > otherwise read on :) > > I was qurious about what makes XEmacs so slow at startup. With the help of > the strace(1) utility I found the following interesting behaviour of > XEmacs19. The XEmacs I am using is version 19.16-1 which comes with the > unstable distribution. > > When XEmacs starts up it creates a UNIX domain socket and tries to connect it > to /tmp/.sockets/audio0. If this special file does not exist (ENOENT is > returned) it does nanosleep(2) five times and sleeps about 1 second each > time. Only after nanosleeping it will continue loading. > > If a plain file named /tmp/.sockets/audio0 is created XEmacs gets > ECONNREFUSED as return value and goes on without nanosleeping or retrying. > This speeds up the startup time for about five seconds on my machine. > /usr/bin/time reports the time going from about 8.7 to 3.7 seconds. > > I hope you find this tip useful, -- TO UNSUBSCRIBE FROM THIS MAILING LIST: e-mail the word "unsubscribe" to [EMAIL PROTECTED] . Trouble? e-mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] .
