Re: Giving up on Linux...

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


On Sunday 22 February 2004 12:15 pm, Dean Mumby wrote:
> I have a intel d865perl mb with hyperthreading , sata , and all the same
> features , i installed fedora , redhat 9, etc with legacy mode and then
> simply switched to enhanced mode and i am running fine. did you check
> wether your system had enabled dma
>  hdparm -tT /dev/sda
> /dev/sda:
>  Timing buffer-cache reads:   3568 MB in  2.00 seconds = 1784.00 MB/sec
>  Timing buffered disk reads:  166 MB in  3.00 seconds =  55.33 MB/sec
> not slow at all

I had DMA enabled... I even set up my hard disk parameters so that they would 
use Ultra DMA.

It isn't a problem with the disk, since there is no disk activity during an 
agonizingly slow paste of a command line.

It's some sort of X/KDE problem, I think.

> [email protected] wrote:
> >... for the foreseeable future on my home system.
> >
> >My home system is an ASUS PVP800-VM motherboard which has hi-speed USB,
> > ACPI, Pentium IV with hyperthread, S-ATA, Intel Extreme 2 graphics (865G
> > chipset).
> >
> >I also have an antique Adaptec 2930 SCSI card for my LS-2000 scanner.
> >
> >Redhat 9 install disks won't even boot on this machine unless I disable
> > the Enhanced IDE (<-- totally bogus!!) ...  Fedora Core 1 is about the
> > same.
> >
> >I decided on FC1 because it uses a later kernel (2.4.22 ... 24?) which
> > seems to support hyperthread and S-ATA better.  When I finally got FC1
> > installed (I had to disable Enhanced IDE, install, compile a custom
> > kernel and then re-enable Enhanced IDE), it was horribly SLOOOOOOW...
> > running a shell in X and pasting a long command line took forever to
> > complete.
> >
> >I figured that this might be due to the graphics driver, so I updated the
> >graphics driver from Intel and then X crashed with a segmentation fault in
> >the closed source part of the driver when attempting to start the X
> > server. Even changing back to the original driver in the XF86Config
> > didn't fix the segfault.  Gotta reinstall?  Who needs this? What a
> > nightmare.
> >
> >The issue here is that Windows XP runs "out-of-the-box" on this system
> > without problems and it is FAST, once it boots.
> >
> >I could try the 2.6 kernel (and I have a LOT of experience with
> > computers), but what's the use?  The 2.6 kernel is not ready for
> > prime-time, not by a long shot, and neither, it seems, is Linux in
> > general.
> >
> >I have seen too many bugs and posts on these topics about
> > SMP/hyperthread/ACPI and other issues that cause the system to lock up
> > after a time of running or not run at all and no fixes seem to be in
> > sight - maybe because these problems are intractable without inside
> > information about ACPI and other things that Intel will give to Microsoft
> > but not to Open Source developers. Maybe Redhat just doesn't care. Who
> > knows?
> >
> >I pity the average user that tries to install and run Linux on their
> > latest hardware.  If I, as an experienced software engineer, throw up my
> > hands, what would a relative newbie who just needs the system to work do?
> >
> >I have real problems seeing how Linux is going to make it to the desktop
> > by 2005 with these kinds of road-blocks.
> >
> >Sad.

[Index of Archives]     [Current Fedora Users]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Fedora SELinux]     [Yosemite News]     [Yosemite Photos]     [KDE Users]     [Fedora Tools]     [Fedora Docs]

  Powered by Linux