Bill Davidsen wrote:
David Boles wrote:FF2 and FF3 beta 2 don't have a problem, FF3 beta 3 does have a problem. Where would *you* say the regression lies? And since when is a kernel compile "intensive?" Unless run with non-standard make options, it's not intensive at all, particularly disk intensive. I just did a build on an older K7 (Athlon) with 1GB RAM and some six year old slow IDE drives running ata-66 connections. FF2, Konquerer and seamonkey all fine, recent FF3 glacial.Nathan Grennan wrote:Brian wrote:I strongly advise against using Konqueror. Use Firefox 3. Here are some benchmarks I ran just yesterday.I would have to advise against Firefox 3.0b3 or later. See the bug below.https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=421482You are going to have explain the logic for this one for me to understand."Excessive fsync during a kernel compile causes Firefox 3 become completely unresponsive till the fsyncs are complete. In some cases if something else i/o intensive is going on Firefox 3 will freeze till the other i/o has completely finished. If it gets really really bad other applications start freezing." You were doing something as intensive as compiling a kernel and Firefox became "unresponsive" and that is Firefox's fault?I think there's a serious evil in FF3, other have suggested the latest release does an order of magnitude more fsync() calls than beta 2.
Chill out fella. I am asking because I want to know about this and maybe help. If I can. Sometimes just asking questions helps the mind snap to a possible solution. But if you want to take an attitude about this you can take it somewhere else. Fair enough?
I don't compile kernels myself anymore. Haven't had to since probably 2001 or so. And then only then because my ZIP drive was not supported. Don't need to do that today since Rawhide gives me a new one, often, and they just work. And I long ago ditched the ZIP drive. :-) So I don't see this.
Well.. does the problem carry on for you in 3.0b5pre? Since that is the latest release. Are you getting the nightly updates? And since that Firefox is only in Rawhide how are you running it on Fedora 8? Or whatever Fedora # you're using? And if you *are* running Rawhide you should say something on fedora-testers not here. Where - BTW - is one of the places that I have not seen anything about this mentioned.
And if you are running Rawhide are you sure that it is *really* Firefox itself? Or maybe the Fedora Rawhide build? I ask this because I have not seen any comments or complaints anywhere else.
Or perhaps a hardware problem? I have retired some equipment in the past at various times for that reason. Now that I think about it a lot of equipment. As Linux moved on it left the hardware behind.
-- David
