Fred, > > >> On Mon, 2001-11-12 at 10:52, Meph Istopheles wrote: > > >> I had it running on an AMD k6-2 with 256MB RAM, & it was slower on a > > >> similar box with 7.1 & 128MB RAM. I also have 7.2 on my P-III 500 with > > >> 256MB RAM, & it's fine -- no worse than when I was running 6.2 or 7.1 on > > >> this box. Odd.
> > > Are you thinking that it's a AMD thing? > > I suspect as much, but it may be the mb. Don't remember off-hand, but > > I think the same one is in each (both came from the same place, & I > > think the only differece is the hard drive size). I'm planning on > > redoing the one with 128MB with 7.2 eventually, so, we'll see. > One of the systems I complained about in my original post is a K6-2/350. I vaguely remember that;-). > I'll have to check and see which kernel the 7.2 installer puts on there. Well, while the AMD box I'd installed the 7.2 on is now only running W2K, the other is running RH 7.1. I thought this might be a good point, but I just checked, & the only kernel installed is i386. I can't say when I'll get to it, but I'll try a generic kernel before I give up on any 7.x on it. The box is for my girl friend's daughter, who's moving in with us next summer (got it for other reasons, as well), & I really don't want her running all those trojans-waiting to happen in Windows. Hope I can make it work with Linux. Maybe RH 6.2 & a generic kernel.... > > >>> It IS faster, though, now that I have upgraded the kernel to 2.4.9-12, > > >>> and force the controler into ata66 mode! > I'd like to find a RH-patched 2.4.14 or .15, so we can get the new VM. My real problem with RH's kernels is only that their bloated. You might considere, as you'll be compiling a new one anyway, going generic. You'll find that customization is that much more controllable. Meph -- "I did this 'cause Linux gives me a woody." -Dave '-ddt->' Taylor, announcing DOOM for Linux _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
