On Fri 25 Oct 2024 at 09:19:30 (-0400), eben@somewhere wrote:
> > Not using synaptic, I don't know why that path was chosen. But
> > you'd need world-execute all the way down from /root itself.
>
> Well the chmod thing is not acceptable.
Totally reasonable; any world-readable file in /root
would
On 10/24/24 22:20, David Wright wrote:
On Thu 24 Oct 2024 at 20:34:18 (-0400), e...@gmx.us wrote:
On 10/24/24 20:01, David Wright wrote:
Because of the ownership:
$ ls -l /var/cache/apt/archives/
total 4
-rw-r- 1 root root0 Apr 16 2022 lock
drwx-- 2 _apt root 4096
Eben, don't worry, got into same issue with some mails sent from debian.
These are then marked with the "*SPAM*" tag in the header, althpough
it is no spam. It as someting to do with DKIM. I already noticed debian of it,
but they say, they are not responsible and some other mailer is do
On 10/24/24 22:33, David Wright wrote:
> Anyway, it appears I can't reply to eben's posts in this thread but,
> if this gets through, I can reply to my own. (And to Daniel Roberts
> earlier.) What triggers their spam detector software, presumably
> "mailclean11", I have no idea.
I don't know why
Dunno, if it is correct:
I fell into the same issue. Just deleted the complete folder, then started
synaptic again and the folder was new created = issue gone.
Not sure, if this is enough. Maybe the reason is, debian is working on umask
settings and (as far as I read), there is normally no "def
On Thu 24 Oct 2024 at 21:20:28 (-0500), David Wright wrote:
[ … ]
> Apologies ditto.
That should have read:
Apologies, BTW, for losing the threading, but for some reason, my
email host rejected so many permutations of my post (nine, in fact)
that it became apparent the problem might lie in the
On Thu 24 Oct 2024 at 20:34:18 (-0400), e...@gmx.us wrote:
> On 10/24/24 20:01, David Wright wrote:
> > Because of the ownership:
> >
> >$ ls -l /var/cache/apt/archives/
> >total 4
> >-rw-r- 1 root root0 Apr 16 2022 lock
> >drwx-- 2 _apt root 4096 Oct 22 19:00 partial
>
On 10/24/24 20:01, David Wright wrote:
Because of the ownership:
$ ls -l /var/cache/apt/archives/
total 4
-rw-r- 1 root root0 Apr 16 2022 lock
drwx-- 2 _apt root 4096 Oct 22 19:00 partial
$
we can assume that _apt is the user that actually downloads packages
(into pa
Because of the ownership:
$ ls -l /var/cache/apt/archives/
total 4
-rw-r- 1 root root0 Apr 16 2022 lock
drwx-- 2 _apt root 4096 Oct 22 19:00 partial
$
we can assume that _apt is the user that actually downloads packages
(into partial/) before APT installs them. But your ass
Dunno if this helps.
My cpu is an Intel I7-2670QM.
The related files, you might need to check are:
/etc/laptop-mode/conf.d/cpufreq.conf
As far as I remember I chaned nothing here in the past.
Second one is:
/etc/modules
in here I set the following
On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 16:20:45 -0400
e...@gmx.us wrote:
Hello e...@gmx.us,
>Is that in the package "linux-cpupower", or where do you get it?
No, it's what I called it. However, upon checking, I see that it's not
in stable. linux-cpupower, AFAIUI, will also do the job.
--
Regards _ "Val
On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 14:46:05 -0400
Eben King wrote:
Hello Eben,
>less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
Yes. I use cpupower-gui for that sort of thing.
--
Regards _ "Valid sig separator is {dash}{dash}{space}"
/ ) "The blindingly obvious
On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 3:04 PM Michael Kjörling wrote:
>
> On 23 Oct 2024 14:46 -0400, from e...@gmx.us (Eben King):
> > I have a variable-speed CPU. Normally the OS manages it. If I want to make
> > less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed
On 10/23/24 17:02, Hans wrote:
Such I can do unattended tasks safely. I believe, this is what the op wants to
do.
The video card I have (GTX 970) doesn't enable its fan by default, plus
gives bizarre ever-changing values for fan speed when you ask it. I found a
workaround, by disabling and r
On 10/23/24 16:46, Hans wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2024, 20:46:05 CEST schrieb Eben King:
>> I have a variable-speed CPU. Normally the OS manages it. If I want to make
>> less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
>
> Try the command "cpufreq-set"
Thanks, it'
Am Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2024, 22:47:54 CEST schrieb Greg Wooledge:
> On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 22:46:09 +0200, Hans wrote:
> > #:/bin/bash
> >
> > cpufreq-set -c 0 -u 800MHz
> > cpufreq-set -c 1 -u 800MHz
> > cpufreq-set -c 2 -u 800MHz
> > cpufreq-set -c 3 -u 800MHz
>
> For the record, that should
Am Mittwoch, 23. Oktober 2024, 20:46:05 CEST schrieb Eben King:
> I have a variable-speed CPU. Normally the OS manages it. If I want to make
> less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
Try the command "cpufreq-set" like the example:
cpufreq-set -c 0 -u 800MHz
or a
On Wed, Oct 23, 2024 at 22:46:09 +0200, Hans wrote:
> #:/bin/bash
>
> cpufreq-set -c 0 -u 800MHz
> cpufreq-set -c 1 -u 800MHz
> cpufreq-set -c 2 -u 800MHz
> cpufreq-set -c 3 -u 800MHz
For the record, that should be #!/bin/bash instead of #:/bin/bash
(or you could use #!/bin/sh in this case, since
Eben King wrote:
> I have a variable-speed CPU. Normally the OS manages it. If I want to make
> less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
If you're trying to control the heat--i.e., the power dissipation--your BIOS
may have a CPU setting for the PL1, Power Limit 1,
On 10/23/24 14:52, Brad Rogers wrote:
On Wed, 23 Oct 2024 14:46:05 -0400
Eben King wrote:
Hello Eben,
less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
Yes. I use cpupower-gui for that sort of thing.
Is that in the package "linux-cpupower", or where do you get it?
On 23 Oct 2024 14:46 -0400, from e...@gmx.us (Eben King):
> I have a variable-speed CPU. Normally the OS manages it. If I want to make
> less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
CPU speed is controlled by the CPU frequency governor.
Set /sys/devices/syst
I have a variable-speed CPU. Normally the OS manages it. If I want to make
less heat inside the case, is it possible to cap it at a certain speed?
--
Did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts? Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze? Cold comfort for change?
Did you exchange a w
2 ssse3
> cx16 xtpr pdcm sse4_1 sse4_2 movbe popcnt tsc_deadline_timer aes rdrand
> lahf_lm 3dnowprefetch epb
> pti tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept
> vpid tsc_adjust smep erms dtherm ida arat
> root@q2:~#
>
> So
c_deadline_timer aes rdrand
lahf_lm 3dnowprefetch epb
pti tpr_shadow vnmi flexpriority ept
vpid tsc_adjust smep erms dtherm ida arat
root@q2:~#
So the max cpu speed should be 2240 MHz.
On the guest it is:
[root@almalinux ~]# lscpu
Architektur: x86_64
John Hasler wrote:
> That's probably it. Mozilla probably only want to support automatic
> profile import one version back.
I think to recall there was a statement that since version xxx it is default
to create a new profile. There is no restriction to one version back.
I wrote:
> How often do you upgrade? I often go for months without doing so:
> that may be why it happens to me.
Celejar writes:
> I usually upgrade as soon as a new version is available
That's probably it. Mozilla probably only want to support automatic
profile import one version back.
I stil
On Mon, 13 Apr 2020 10:43:29 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> Celejar writes:
> > I seem to have memory leaks with recent Firefox (currently 74.0.1-1
> > from Sid) - memory use goes slowly but steadily up, and eventually
> > gets maxed out and the system grinds to a halt. It takes a while for
> > this
Celejar writes:
> I seem to have memory leaks with recent Firefox (currently 74.0.1-1
> from Sid) - memory use goes slowly but steadily up, and eventually
> gets maxed out and the system grinds to a halt. It takes a while for
> this to happen, but I find myself eventually needing to kill and
> rest
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 10:21:42 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> rhkramer writes:
> > When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie
> > system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread
> > having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with
> > mini
Andrei writes:
> How do you upgrade / from where do you get the packages? (apt,
> manually installed deb, etc.)
Apt from Debian/Sid. Just did it a couple of days ago.
--
John Hasler
jhas...@newsguy.com
Elmwood, WI USA
On Sb, 11 apr 20, 18:43:38, John Hasler wrote:
> David Wright writes:
> > What sort of upgrade? Just the regular security fixes (which seem to
> > be quite frequent recently), or point-releases, or what? And what
> > parts of your profile do you lose? Bookmarks, cookies (like the ones
> > you migh
David Wright writes:
> What sort of upgrade? Just the regular security fixes (which seem to
> be quite frequent recently), or point-releases, or what? And what
> parts of your profile do you lose? Bookmarks, cookies (like the ones
> you might want to keep for logins) or what?
Upstream releases (t
I wrote:
> What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes
> (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few
> years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the
> irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I
> upgrade Firef
On Sat, 11 Apr 2020 10:21:42 -0500
John Hasler wrote:
> What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes
> (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a
> few years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the
> irritation of being required to c
On Sat 11 Apr 2020 at 10:21:42 (-0500), John Hasler wrote:
> rhkramer writes:
> > When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie
> > system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread
> > having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with
> > m
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> RAM is still (to me) the most cost effective upgrade to an existing
> system.
yes this is true, but the bottle neck could be the cache or the disk IO. If
you have slow disk, RAM can be advantage. If it is the cache, may be it is
time to upgrade the system (cpu and/or m
John Hasler wrote:
> What Firefox version? I used to see frequent Firefox crashes
> (apparently memory leaks: my system is always up) but that stopped a few
> years ago (though the irritation of that has been replaced by the
> irritation of being required to create a new profile every time I
> up
rhkramer writes:
> When I have as few as 10 to 15 tabs open on the Firefox on my Jessie
> system, Firefox crashes (I mentioned in a previous post in this thread
> having a thousand or more tabs "open" in Firefox on Wheezy with
> minimal problems -- yes occasional crashes (maybe once every 2 to 4
>
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 09:39:06 AM deloptes wrote:
> rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I think my bottleneck these days is again RAM
> Look at the L1 L2 L3 cache. Many people underestimate this
>
> here are two examples from different pcs
>
> # lscpu | grep cache
> L1d cache: 16K
> L1
rhkra...@gmail.com wrote:
> I think my bottleneck these days is again RAM, on my daily driver I have
> 16 GB, but sometimes have 1000 or more tabs "open" in Firefox (on Wheezy).
> ("Open" is a little misleading -- occasionally Firefox crashes. When it
> does, I restart it and choose the option to
On Saturday, April 11, 2020 05:45:56 AM Tixy wrote:
> On Fri, 2020-04-10 at 20:01 -0700, David Christensen wrote:
> > My laptop is maxed out at 2 GB. If I open more than a few browser
> > windows with heavy JavaScript, the computer slows to a snail's pace.
>
> Would the amount of RAM affect brows
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:16:47PM +0300, Reco wrote:
As far as I remember, the bogomips number has consistently been twice the
current clock frequency on any x86 PCU I have ever run Linux on.
Either your math is off, or they've changed it.
$ lscpu | egrep '(Vendor|MHz|MIPS)' # This PC
Vendo
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 01:47:19PM -0500, David Wright wrote:
On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 11:04:48 (-0400), Michael Stone wrote:
FWIW, even the kernel doesn't use naive busy loops anymore on newer
hardware. (TSC or MWAIT is used, depending on what the processor
supports.)
I've programmed a "busy loo
On Fri 26 Oct 2018 at 11:04:48 (-0400), Michael Stone wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 05:34:26PM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:59:16AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:57:29AM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > > Why would you need a *program* to do that then
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 02:02:06PM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 05:19:58PM +, Long Wind wrote:
is there any general-purpose testing utility? i remember in early days some
program for DOS can report benchmark, (maybe made by nordon?) . and intel 486
always seems faste
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 07:51:16PM +0200, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
> Le 26/10/2018 à 16:34, Reco a écrit :
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:59:16AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:57:29AM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > > >
> > > > grep bogomips /proc/cpuinfo
> > >
> > > Anyo
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 05:19:58PM +, Long Wind wrote:
is there any general-purpose testing utility? i remember in early days some
program for DOS can report benchmark, (maybe made by nordon?) . and intel 486
always seems faster than 386.
Try something like
http://www.cpu-world.com/Compa
Le 26/10/2018 à 16:34, Reco a écrit :
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:59:16AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:57:29AM +0300, Reco wrote:
grep bogomips /proc/cpuinfo
Anyone reading that advice: ignore it. You cannot use bogomips to meaningfully
compare processors.
The re
Thank Greg!
is there any general-purpose testing utility? i remember in early days some
program for DOS can report benchmark, (maybe made by nordon?) . and intel 486
always seems faster than 386.
On Friday, October 26, 2018 8:40 PM, Greg Wooledge
wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:05
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 05:34:26PM +0300, Reco wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:59:16AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:57:29AM +0300, Reco wrote:
> Why would you need a *program* to do that then you have Linux kernel
> already?
>
> grep bogomips /proc/cpuinfo
Anyone rea
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:21:41PM +0100, mick crane wrote:
> On 2018-10-26 06:57, Reco wrote:
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:05:36AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> > > any package that test cpu/system speed and report benchmark?
> > > i have 2 old pc: intel pentium D 2.8 G and
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 09:59:16AM -0400, Michael Stone wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:57:29AM +0300, Reco wrote:
> > Why would you need a *program* to do that then you have Linux kernel
> > already?
> >
> > grep bogomips /proc/cpuinfo
>
> Anyone reading that advice: ignore it.
On 2018-10-26 06:57, Reco wrote:
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:05:36AM +, Long Wind wrote:
any package that test cpu/system speed and report benchmark?
i have 2 old pc: intel pentium D 2.8 G and amd athlon 64 3800i bought
them from 2nd hand dealers for about same priceso i think they're
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:57:29AM +0300, Reco wrote:
Why would you need a *program* to do that then you have Linux kernel
already?
grep bogomips /proc/cpuinfo
Anyone reading that advice: ignore it. You cannot use bogomips to
meaningfully compare processors.
Mike Stone
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:05:36AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> any package that test cpu/system speed and report benchmark?
> i have 2 old pc: intel pentium D 2.8 G and amd athlon 64 3800i bought them
> from 2nd hand dealers for about same priceso i think they're about same speed
The performance of
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:54:26 +0300
Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:42:53AM +0200, arne wrote:
> > On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:26:13 +0300
> > Reco wrote:
> >
> > > Hi.
> > >
> > > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:17:31AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> > > > Thank Reco!
> > >
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 10:42:53AM +0200, arne wrote:
> On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:26:13 +0300
> Reco wrote:
>
> > Hi.
> >
> > On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:17:31AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> > > Thank Reco!
> >
> > You're welcome.
> >
> >
> > > intel get higher mark than amd
> >
On Fri, 26 Oct 2018 11:26:13 +0300
Reco wrote:
> Hi.
>
> On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:17:31AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> > Thank Reco!
>
> You're welcome.
>
>
> > intel get higher mark than amd
>
> That's expected. You need raw CPU power - you buy Intel.
>
You need power buy AMD thr
There is a "perf" package complementing the linux kernel package, for example if
the kernel package is linux-image-4.17.0-3-amd64 the perf package is
linux-perf-4.17. Also, take a look at this web page
http://www.brendangregg.com/FlameGraphs/cpuflamegraphs.html about profiling by
Brendan Gregg.
Re
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 08:17:31AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> Thank Reco!
You're welcome.
> intel get higher mark than amd
That's expected. You need raw CPU power - you buy Intel.
> but could you explain a little about your command and bogomips?
> i can't find manual about such in
Hi.
On Fri, Oct 26, 2018 at 03:05:36AM +, Long Wind wrote:
> any package that test cpu/system speed and report benchmark?
> i have 2 old pc: intel pentium D 2.8 G and amd athlon 64 3800i bought them
> from 2nd hand dealers for about same priceso i think they're about same speed
Why w
> > >
> > > ram: 256 MB
> > >
On 21.07.07 22:34, Telly Williams wrote:
> Am I seeing things?
> I just looked in the BIOS under the Advanced section and under the CPU Speed
> (366 MHz) it shows:
> Cache RAM: 512 KB
> Am I looking at s
On 22.07.07 13:43, Aenn Seidhe Priest wrote:
> Socket 7 motherboards used to have L2 cache on themselves (unlike P-IIs
> which had everything - L1 cache, L2 cache - in the processor cartridge).
Well - first PII's had its L2 cache on separate chip on the cartridge, but
L1 cache was on the CPU chip.
Telly Williams wrote:
> Thing is,
>
> I did upgrade the ram to 256 MB, and, to be honest, it runs just as
> fast as it did before the upgrade (it seemed).
>
> I think I'll do a reinstall with Puppy and see what's up.
But will run more apps than before... The RAM just make your
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 01:43:59PM -0600, Aenn Seidhe Priest wrote:
> You might try to look at a better CPU like K6-II/450, K6-III or somesuch.
> Second-hand dump stores might have the processors in stock, if not solo,
> then probably even with a motherboard.
>
Thanks,
It uses a SPAX mot
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 11:20:31AM -0700, David Fox wrote:
>
>
> Actually, a good thing to do on machines like that is upgrade the RAM -
> because
> many distros these days won't even install on a machine with less than maybe
> 256 megs of RAM. A lot want >64 megs of RAM.
>
> Of course, there's
You might try to look at a better CPU like K6-II/450, K6-III or somesuch.
Second-hand dump stores might have the processors in stock, if not solo,
then probably even with a motherboard.
Socket 7 motherboards used to have L2 cache on themselves (unlike P-IIs
which had everything - L1 cache, L2 cach
On Sun, Jul 22, 2007 at 05:44:35PM +, BartlebyScrivener wrote:
>
> Well, I still want to know the Model number. Is it a 760ED?
>
> Did you look into Damn Small Linux?
>
> If not, how did you trim down Debian?
>
> I have a 760ED I'm thinking of resurrecting just for fun.
>
> rd
Hi,
On 7/22/07, Telly Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I saw this computer sitting in my friend's mom's house and asked to
fix it for her (it didn't run at
all). I didn't anticipate the problems that I would face, mostly because
I didn't know then what I now k
Apologies about that la
On 7/22/07, Telly Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I get:
> >
> > # dmidecode 2.8
> > # No SMBIOS nor DMI entry point found, sorry
> >
>
> Dunno. Have to wait for a wizard to come along. Are you starting a
> computer museum? What model is that ThinkPad?
>
> It's ten yea
On Jul 22, 12:40 pm, Telly Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> It's not the TP. The TP is OK and, in fact, runs great. I'll
> probably use it as a firewall.
Well, I still want to know the Model number. Is it a 760ED?
Did you look into Damn Small Linux?
If not, how did you trim dow
> > I get:
> >
> > # dmidecode 2.8
> > # No SMBIOS nor DMI entry point found, sorry
> >
>
> Dunno. Have to wait for a wizard to come along. Are you starting a
> computer museum? What model is that ThinkPad?
>
> It's ten years old, isn't it?
(Laughs)
No,
It's not the
On Jul 22, 1:30 am, Telly Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What do you get when you:
>
> > sudo dmidecode | grep Cache
>
> I get:
>
> # dmidecode 2.8
> # No SMBIOS nor DMI entry point found, sorry
>
Dunno. Have to wait for a wizard to come along. Are you starting a
compute
things?
I just looked in the BIOS under the Advanced section and under the CPU
Speed (366 MHz) it shows:
Cache RAM: 512 KB
This cache ran much much slower than the cache on the PII.
Comparing a K6 (not even a K6-II/III) and a PII is a bit like comparing
a Pentium4 and an
> What do you get when you:
>
> sudo dmidecode | grep Cache
>
I get:
# dmidecode 2.8
# No SMBIOS nor DMI entry point found, sorry
What does that mean? I googled this response and only found lots of
scripts. I apt-get the package and it's already installed. This does
On Jul 21, 11:40 pm, Telly Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Am I looking at something different, or am I getting jipped on my
> Cache RAM for my CPU? If so, how can I reclaim the lost Cache RAM?
What do you get when you:
sudo dmidecode | grep Cache
?
rd
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, emai
gt; > ram: 256 MB
> >
Am I seeing things?
I just looked in the BIOS under the Advanced section and under the CPU
Speed (366 MHz) it shows:
Cache RAM: 512 KB
Am I looking at something different, or am I getting jipped on my Cache
RAM for my CPU?
Well, CPUInfo has the answer: cache size of 256K for the P-II, and only 64
for K6. Also, the P-II had high-speed on-die cache, whereas the K6 had its
cache memory separated on the motherboard (might be different for notebook
versions though). That, and possibly kernel/code optimisation for the P-II
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 07/21/07 20:08, Telly Williams wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an HP Pavilion 6360 with Linux Debian. I also have a
> Thinkpad that a friend gave me recently which runs Linux Debian,
> as well.
>
> Here's the thing.
>
> The TP, under cpuinfo,
Telly Williams wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I have an HP Pavilion 6360 with Linux Debian. I also have a Thinkpad
> that a friend gave me recently which runs Linux Debian, as well.
>
> Here's the thing.
>
> The TP, under cpuinfo, has:
>
> model name: Mobile Pentium II
>
On 7/21/07, Telly Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hi,
The HP runs MUCH slower than the TP. Why is that? Is that
supposed to happen? Is it because of the step and the cache size? Is it
the ram
You're comparing apples with oranges but generally the difference (but
not always, i
Hi,
I have an HP Pavilion 6360 with Linux Debian. I also have a Thinkpad
that a friend gave me recently which runs Linux Debian, as well.
Here's the thing.
The TP, under cpuinfo, has:
model name: Mobile Pentium II
cpu MHz: 365.033
Christian Christmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I'm looking for a tool to adjust the speed of my
> CPU depending on if my notebook is running with a
> battery or without.
> Are there any debian packages I could use?
cpufreqd
cpudyn
powernowd
--
You win again, gravity!
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE,
Christian Christmann wrote:
I'm looking for a tool to adjust the speed of my
CPU depending on if my notebook is running with a
battery or without.
Are there any debian packages I could use?
I have a Toshiba laptop, so I use toshset.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
Christian Christmann wrote:
HI,
I'm looking for a tool to adjust the speed of my
CPU depending on if my notebook is running with a
battery or without.
Are there any debian packages I could use?
Thank you
Regards,
Christian
Perhaps you could check out
package powermgmt-base
--
Thijs Koetsier
ww
HI,
I'm looking for a tool to adjust the speed of my
CPU depending on if my notebook is running with a
battery or without.
Are there any debian packages I could use?
Thank you
Regards,
Christian
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
7;s for sure! There are various ways to check
your CPU speed. For example, you can run glxgears. If you don't have a
dri enabled 3D card, it will use software rendering and that is _very_
CPU intesive. Check the framerate. Or compile a kernel (or any large
source project), or take a mathemati
slow, and looked up the CPU
speed and Linux reports it to be 259MHz while it should be 750MHz as the
BIOS reports.
Using the stock bf24 kernel, does kde feel faster?
David
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
eeded a working laptop.
> Anyway it's all working but KDE feels very slow, and looked up the CPU
> speed and Linux reports it to be 259MHz while it should be 750MHz as the
> BIOS reports.
Using the stock bf24 kernel, does kde feel faster?
David
--
Hi! I'm a .signature virus. Copy
p the CPU
speed and Linux reports it to be 259MHz while it should be 750MHz as the
BIOS reports.
When using the 2.4.26 kernel with custom .config file. Taking the info
from dmesg:
Initializing CPU#0
Detected 258.884 MHz processor.
Calibrating delay loop... 534.11 BogoMIPS
CPU: L1 I cache: 16K,
On Wed, 2003-07-09 at 16:23, Jamin W. Collins wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 11:52:52AM +0100, Shri Shrikumar wrote:
> > Alvin Oga wrote:
> >
> > >a P4 should be running at about 30-35C ... in idle
> >
> > Yes, you are correct. It runs 30-35C at idle. At 100% utlisation for a
> > while, it pops
On Wed, 9 Jul 2003, Shri Shrikumar wrote:
> Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> >a P4 should be running at about 30-35C ... in idle
> >
> >
> Yes, you are correct. It runs 30-35C at idle. At 100% utlisation for a
> while, it pops up to around 69C.
on my 1U boxes ... at 100% utilization ( xload or top show
On Wed, Jul 09, 2003 at 11:52:52AM +0100, Shri Shrikumar wrote:
> Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> >a P4 should be running at about 30-35C ... in idle
>
> Yes, you are correct. It runs 30-35C at idle. At 100% utlisation for a
> while, it pops up to around 69C.
It could just be me, but that seems very execess
--- Shri Shrikumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió: > Alvin Oga wrote:
>
> >a P4 should be running at about 30-35C ... in idle
> >
> >
> Yes, you are correct. It runs 30-35C at idle. At 100% utlisation for a
> while, it pops up to around 69C.
>
> Shri
Thankfully my numbers are now falling more
Alvin Oga wrote:
a P4 should be running at about 30-35C ... in idle
Yes, you are correct. It runs 30-35C at idle. At 100% utlisation for a
while, it pops up to around 69C.
Shri
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 8 Jul 2003, Shri Shrikumar wrote:
> On Tue, 2003-07-08 at 00:52, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> > I adjusted the the "FSB Frequency" down from 166 MHz to 133 MHz. I usually
> > get temps of 48-52 C after a few hours of normal use (running as a 1900+).
> > If I do anything CPU intensive (compile a
Op di 08-07-2003, om 17:34 schreef Jamin W. Collins:
> On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 02:54:54PM +0200, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> > --- "Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi?:
> >
> > The mobo is rated for a 3200+ @ 400 MHz FSB and so is the Zalman.
> > Memory _should_ be good too, it's brand n
On Tue, Jul 08, 2003 at 02:54:54PM +0200, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
> --- "Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribi?:
>
> The mobo is rated for a 3200+ @ 400 MHz FSB and so is the Zalman.
> Memory _should_ be good too, it's brand new.
That's never stopped memory from being bad in the past. H
--- "Jamin W. Collins" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> escribió:
> On Mon, Jul 07, 2003 at 11:39:21PM +0200, Roberto Sanchez wrote:
>
> > I have manage to figure out that by messing with the chipset settings
> > in the BIOS I can change the speed of the CPU's opertation. I.e.,
> > setting a speed of 166 MH
On Tue, 8 Jul 2003 01:52:06 +0200 (CEST)
Roberto Sanchez <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> The problem I am having now is that I can't even run it at the _rated_
> clock speed. I have to run it my 2500+ as a 1900+ to keep it from
> locking up.
>
> I adjusted the the "FSB Frequency" down from 166 MHz
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
