[gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 291 bytes --]

Hi! Everybody!
I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In my
machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do you
think so? And how can you solve this problem?

--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 317 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 750 bytes --]

Works fine on mine; what are your USE flags?

On 30/04/06, wu chuanwen <wcw8410@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi! Everybody!
> I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In my
> machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
> even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do you
> think so? And how can you solve this problem?
>
> --
> wcw
>



--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1155 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 989 bytes --]

2006/4/30, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com>:
>
> Works fine on mine; what are your USE flags?
>

USE="gtk gnome gcj hal -qt -kde dvd alsa cdr nptl nptlonly pic".It's OK!
Oh god! Just like now ,i just open two tab,it's so slow when i switch
between the two tab.

On 30/04/06, wu chuanwen <wcw8410@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > Hi! Everybody!
> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In
> > my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
> > even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Doyou think so? And how can you solve this problem?
> >
> > --
> > wcw
> >
>
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Argument against Linux number 6,033:
>
> "...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
> yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
> just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."
>



--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2046 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

wu chuanwen wrote:
> 
> 
> 2006/4/30, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com 
> <mailto:jeff.rollin@gmail.com>>:
> 
>     Works fine on mine; what are your USE flags?
> 
> USE="gtk gnome gcj hal -qt -kde dvd alsa cdr nptl nptlonly pic".

Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
you run

	emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox

I get:

[ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2-r1 [1.5.0.2] USE="-debug gnome -ipv6 java -mozdevelop -xinerama xprint" 0 kB

Have you yet tried a blank profile?

Alexander Skwar

PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.
-- 
"Is it really you, Fuzz, or is it Memorex, or is it radiation sickness?"
-- Sonic Disruptors comics
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1336 bytes --]

I know a lot of people don't recommend this, but I haven't had any trouble
with CFLAGS="-O3", specifically in firefox 1.5.0.2

On 30/04/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
>
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2006/4/30, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com
> > <mailto:jeff.rollin@gmail.com>>:
> >
> >     Works fine on mine; what are your USE flags?
> >
> > USE="gtk gnome gcj hal -qt -kde dvd alsa cdr nptl nptlonly pic".
>
> Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
> you run
>
>         emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
>
> I get:
>
> [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2-r1 [1.5.0.2]
> USE="-debug gnome -ipv6 java -mozdevelop -xinerama xprint" 0 kB
>
> Have you yet tried a blank profile?
>
> Alexander Skwar
>
> PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.
> --
> "Is it really you, Fuzz, or is it Memorex, or is it radiation sickness?"
> -- Sonic Disruptors comics
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2012 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1943 bytes --]

Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of Gentoo
till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG"

On 30/04/06, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I know a lot of people don't recommend this, but I haven't had any trouble
> with CFLAGS="-O3", specifically in firefox 1.5.0.2
>
>
> On 30/04/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
> >
> > wu chuanwen wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > > 2006/4/30, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com
> > > <mailto:jeff.rollin@gmail.com>>:
> > >
> > >     Works fine on mine; what are your USE flags?
> > >
> > > USE="gtk gnome gcj hal -qt -kde dvd alsa cdr nptl nptlonly pic".
> >
> > Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
> > you run
> >
> >         emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
> >
> > I get:
> >
> > [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2-r1 [1.5.0.2]
> > USE="-debug gnome -ipv6 java -mozdevelop -xinerama xprint" 0 kB
> >
> > Have you yet tried a blank profile?
> >
> > Alexander Skwar
> >
> > PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.
> > --
> > "Is it really you, Fuzz, or is it Memorex, or is it radiation sickness?"
> >
> > -- Sonic Disruptors comics
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Argument against Linux number 6,033:
>
> "...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
> yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
> just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."
>



--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3513 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Jeff Rollin wrote:

> Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of 
> Gentoo till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG"

What's that supposed to do? It doesn't seem to be a valid USE flag.

Alexander Skwar

PS: Top posts are no good.
-- 
Brian Griffin: Seriously, who buys a novelty fire extinguisher?
Peter Griffin: I'll tell you who: someone who cares enough about physical comedy
to put his entire family into serious danger, that's who.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Ryan Tandy]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Jeff Rollin wrote:
>
>> Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of 
>> Gentoo till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG"
>
> What's that supposed to do? It doesn't seem to be a valid USE flag.
I think he meant as CFLAGS, not as USE.  In any case, it would only have 
an effect in code that supports the G_DISABLE_DEBUG macro...
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3104 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 April 2006 07:22 am, Jeff Rollin wrote:
> Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of Gentoo
> till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG"

So, this is going to be a very elementary question, but it's honestly because 
I don't know.

I have major problems with Firefox (and even Eclipse) acting very sluggishly.  
It's understandably annoying, but after using Windows for ten years, I've 
learned to just swallow a lot of garbage and forget about it.  However, now 
that there's (possibly) a way to fix all this...

I don't know about USE flags.  I think I get that they're special compile-time 
preprocessor macros to enable/disable certain things, but I don't know how to 
use them, as in change them.

If my apps all are compiled with debug extensions... that would explain why 
Gentoo is working (speed-wise) like Kubuntu and other Debian-based distros 
did.

Well, I tried this:

> localhost ~ # emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.keywords: 
app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19
> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.keywords: dev-libs/libassuan-0.6.10
> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.keywords: dev-libs/libksba-0.9.12
> --- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: 
=dev-libs/libassuan-0.6.10 ~x86
> --- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: 
=dev-libs/libksba-0.9.12 ~x86
> --- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: 
=app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19 ~x86

This part I'm worried about, but am not trying to fix right now.  Any 
suggestions, though OT, would be nice.

> These are the packages that I would merge, in reverse order:

> Calculating dependencies ...done!
> [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.0.8 [1.0.7-r4] -debug +gnome 
+ipv6 +java* -mozcalendar -mozdevelop -moznoxft -mozsvg +truetype -xinerama 
-xprint 32,135 kB

I see here that I've got it compiled with the debug pointers (which I'm told 
slow things down) and it has no KDE/Qt support, either.  This... could be a 
problem.

First:

I'd like to know where I can change the USE flags globally, such that all new 
activity will have no debug support, which I don't need.  I'd also like to 
add KDE/Qt functionality, if that's possible on the global level as well.  I 
know this is probably something I should have caught when I installed, but 
that was a while ago, and I didn't know what a USE flag was, so I left it at 
the default settings, not wanting to incur the Wrath of the Malconfigured OS.

Second:

How can I specifically re-build a package with changed USE flags?  In other 
words, I'd like to rebuild a few things I use often and am having speed 
issues with, but not the whole system (just yet - I'll want a distcc network 
up before I attempt the whole system all at once, esp. on this little IBM 
X40...)

Thanks for your time!  Hope I'm not too annoying!  And if there's any part of 
my Netiquette that isn't correct, tell me.  I've only been an active mailing 
list user for about a year and a half now, so I'm still learning!

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1999 bytes --]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> > These are the packages that I would merge, in reverse order:
> 
> > Calculating dependencies ...done!
> > [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.0.8 [1.0.7-r4] -debug +gnome 
> +ipv6 +java* -mozcalendar -mozdevelop -moznoxft -mozsvg +truetype -xinerama 
> -xprint 32,135 kB
> 
> I see here that I've got it compiled with the debug pointers (which I'm told 
> slow things down) and it has no KDE/Qt support, either.  This... could be a 
> problem.

-debug means you don't have debug pointers.. A use flag can be considered
as a configure option.. -debug means --disable-debug, +gnome means
--enable-gnome... What -debug does is it disables debugging, i.e., it
strips the binary of debugging symbols.. +flags enables support for the
feature.. To have a look at all the USE flag and what they do take a
look at /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc and
/usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc

> First:
> 
> I'd like to know where I can change the USE flags globally, such that all new 
> activity will have no debug support, which I don't need.  I'd also like to 
> add KDE/Qt functionality, if that's possible on the global level as well.
> (snip)

Well add the following line to /etc/make.conf
	USE="kde qt"

I do believe that kde, qt and -debug are in make.defaults.. Atleast in
x86 profiles they are, so i don't think you need to add the USE="kde qt"
line to /etc/make.conf as they are enabled by default

> How can I specifically re-build a package with changed USE flags?  (snip)

emerge --newuse --update --deep world

Hope this helps,
Farhan Ahmed

PS: For more info about portage and USE flags, check the Gentoo
documentation,
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=2
read all the sections, they contain valuable info..
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 4212 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 04:32 pm, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > > These are the packages that I would merge, in reverse order:
> > >
> > > Calculating dependencies ...done!
> > > [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.0.8 [1.0.7-r4] -debug
> > > +gnome
> >
> > +ipv6 +java* -mozcalendar -mozdevelop -moznoxft -mozsvg +truetype
> > -xinerama -xprint 32,135 kB
> >
> > I see here that I've got it compiled with the debug pointers (which I'm
> > told slow things down) and it has no KDE/Qt support, either.  This...
> > could be a problem.
>
> -debug means you don't have debug pointers.. A use flag can be considered
> as a configure option.. -debug means --disable-debug, +gnome means
> --enable-gnome... What -debug does is it disables debugging, i.e., it
> strips the binary of debugging symbols.. +flags enables support for the
> feature.. To have a look at all the USE flag and what they do take a
> look at /usr/portage/profiles/use.desc and
> /usr/portage/profiles/use.local.desc

Okay, that makes a lot of sense.  That's something I didn't know.

So I went through all those different USE flags, and added ones I knew I could 
add without anything blowing up.  This is what I get:

# These settings were set by the catalyst build script that automatically 
built this stage
# Please consult /etc/make.conf.example for a more detailed example
#CFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686 -pipe"
CFLAGS="-march=i686 -O2 -pipe"
CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"
MAKEOPTS=""
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=""
USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bzip2 
cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri dvd dvdread elibc_glibc 
emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam fastbuild foomaticdb 
force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm gstreamer 
gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg java javascript kde 
kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad memlimit mikmod mhash mng 
motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl ogg opengl oss pam pcre 
pdflib perl png posix python qt quicktime readline samba sdl session 
simplexml slang soap sockets spell spl ssl sse sse2 svg tcltk tcpd tiff 
tokenizer truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb udev userland_GNU vorbis 
x86 xml xml2 xmms xsl xv zlib"
FEATURES=""

If anyone has any suggestions to further fine-tune this for a Pentium-M 1.0 
GHz Ultra-Low Voltage chip, please tell me.

> > First:
> >
> > I'd like to know where I can change the USE flags globally, such that all
> > new activity will have no debug support, which I don't need.  I'd also
> > like to add KDE/Qt functionality, if that's possible on the global level
> > as well. (snip)
>
> Well add the following line to /etc/make.conf
> 	USE="kde qt"
>
> I do believe that kde, qt and -debug are in make.defaults.. Atleast in
> x86 profiles they are, so i don't think you need to add the USE="kde qt"
> line to /etc/make.conf as they are enabled by default

I looked and they were already there.  However, MMX, SSE and SSE2 were not 
enabled, so I enabled those.

> > How can I specifically re-build a package with changed USE flags?  (snip)
>
> emerge --newuse --update --deep world

I'll try that just a little later, when I can leave my laptop without needing 
to use it for anything, so that it can happily chew away at everything 
without my needing to lag through other things.

> Hope this helps,

It did!  Thanks a bunch.  I'm going to have fun tweaking my system for maximum 
performance (one of my favorite passtimes while coding, I have to admit) with 
these new options open to me!

> Farhan Ahmed
>
> PS: For more info about portage and USE flags, check the Gentoo
> documentation,
> http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=2
> read all the sections, they contain valuable info..

I'll put them on my "to-read" list.  Right now I've got to go hunting through 
MSDN for some junk on Visual C/C++/C#, for work.  I don't normally go to MSDN 
of my own accord, other than to check up on them and make sure they're still 
there making millions of people angry.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3314 bytes --]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> So I went through all those different USE flags, and added ones I knew I could 
> add without anything blowing up.  This is what I get:
> 
> # These settings were set by the catalyst build script that automatically 
> built this stage
> # Please consult /etc/make.conf.example for a more detailed example
> #CFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686 -pipe"
> CFLAGS="-march=i686 -O2 -pipe"

I'd suggest CFLAGS="-O2 -march=i686 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"

> CHOST="i686-pc-linux-gnu"
> CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS}"

	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"

> MAKEOPTS=""

	MAKEOPTS="-j2"

> ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=""

If you wish to have latest packages, change ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86", it
might make your system a bit unstable but going through my experience it
has not broken a thing in my system.

Also if you wish add these lines to /etc/make.conf

	LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,-z,now,--sort-common"

> USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bzip2 
> cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri dvd dvdread elibc_glibc 
> emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam fastbuild foomaticdb 
> force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm gstreamer 
> gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg java javascript kde 
> kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad memlimit mikmod mhash mng 
> motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl ogg opengl oss pam pcre 
> pdflib perl png posix python qt quicktime readline samba sdl session 
> simplexml slang soap sockets spell spl ssl sse sse2 svg tcltk tcpd tiff 
> tokenizer truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb udev userland_GNU vorbis 
> x86 xml xml2 xmms xsl xv zlib"

Do you really need all these USE flags and features? I think not.. Add
USE flags that really are useful not add them just because they might
become useful sometime.. The more features you have in your packages,
the slower and more memory hungry they are.. Take a look at my USE
flags..

USE="-X -arts -apache2 -berkdb -cups -dri -eds -esd -gdbm -gnome
-gstreamer -gtk -gpm -xmms 3dnow acl bash-completion bzip2 fbcon hal lzo
mbox mmx nsplugin nvidia offensive sse svga tiff urandom"

-X because I don't every application to be built with X support, -arts
because of the same reason.. The applications that i think will need X
support I add a line like this to /etc/portage/package.use

	media-libs/imlib2 X

Also if i need to remove some support from packages, i add line like
this to /etc/portage/package.use

	www-client/links -jpeg -png -sdl -svga -tiff

I also don't suggest hardened USE flag.. You most certainly don't need
them.. Trust me..

Add these lines to /etc/make.conf to further fine tune tour system..

	VIDEO_CARDS="<your video card" #like nvidia, ati
	INPUT_DEVICES="keyboard mouse" #add anything extra you've

Remember, always add the minimum USE flags you need to /etc/make.conf,
you should always tune your system to specific packages by adding USE
flags to be used for the specific package to /etc/portage/package.use

> (snip)

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:


> 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
>

no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If you 
want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.


> > MAKEOPTS=""
>
> 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"

-j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the compiling is 
running in the background. 

>
> > ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=""

>
> Also if you wish add these lines to /etc/make.conf
>
> 	LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,-z,now,--sort-common"

are you totally sure, that this do not break something? do this flags bring 
anything, that can not be archived with prelink?

Again, you might want to use them, but you should not tell somebody else to 
use them.-

>
> > USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts
> > bzip2 cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri dvd dvdread
> > elibc_glibc emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam fastbuild
> > foomaticdb
> > force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm
> > gstreamer gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg java
> > javascript kde kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad memlimit
> > mikmod mhash mng motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl ogg
> > opengl oss pam pcre pdflib perl png posix python qt quicktime readline
> > samba sdl session simplexml slang soap sockets spell spl ssl sse sse2 svg
> > tcltk tcpd tiff tokenizer truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb udev
> > userland_GNU vorbis x86 xml xml2 xmms xsl xv zlib"
>
> Do you really need all these USE flags and features? I think not.. Add
> USE flags that really are useful not add them just because they might
> become useful sometime.. The more features you have in your packages,
> the slower and more memory hungry they are.. Take a look at my USE
> flags..

you think - but you don't know what he wants and needs.

btw, I would emerge ufed and work down the list....

>
> USE="-X -arts -apache2 -berkdb -cups -dri -eds -esd -gdbm -gnome
> -gstreamer -gtk -gpm -xmms 3dnow acl bash-completion bzip2 fbcon hal lzo
> mbox mmx nsplugin nvidia offensive sse svga tiff urandom"
>
> -X because I don't every application to be built with X support, -arts
> because of the same reason.. The applications that i think will need X
> support I add a line like this to /etc/portage/package.use

so you want to break douzends of packages for him? Why? -dri? Maybe he needs 
it? fbcon? Why? who needs it? You are telling him to deactivate usefull stuff 
and activate useless? Great!


> 	VIDEO_CARDS="<your video card" #like nvidia, ati
that is not needed anymore. Look into the use descriptions. Or even better, 
get familiar with ufed.


> Remember, always add the minimum USE flags you need to /etc/make.conf,
> you should always tune your system to specific packages by adding USE
> flags to be used for the specific package to /etc/portage/package.use

oh, yeah, increase the work and risk subtle breakage here and there ....
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3181 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 11:51 pm, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
>
> no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If you
> want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.

Why I asked before doing.  What is it?

> > > MAKEOPTS=""
> >
> > 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"
>
> -j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the compiling
> is running in the background.

Okay.  That sounds non-violate.

> > > USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb
> > > bitmap-fonts bzip2 cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri
> > > dvd dvdread elibc_glibc emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam
> > > fastbuild foomaticdb
> > > force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm
> > > gstreamer gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg java
> > > javascript kde kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad memlimit
> > > mikmod mhash mng motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl ogg
> > > opengl oss pam pcre pdflib perl png posix python qt quicktime readline
> > > samba sdl session simplexml slang soap sockets spell spl ssl sse sse2
> > > svg tcltk tcpd tiff tokenizer truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb
> > > udev userland_GNU vorbis x86 xml xml2 xmms xsl xv zlib"
> >
> > Do you really need all these USE flags and features? I think not.. Add
> > USE flags that really are useful not add them just because they might
> > become useful sometime.. The more features you have in your packages,
> > the slower and more memory hungry they are.. Take a look at my USE
> > flags..
>
> you think - but you don't know what he wants and needs.

I didn't change many from the defaults because I didn't know what most of them 
were.  If it ain't broke don't fix it.

> btw, I would emerge ufed and work down the list....

I'll emerge it now, and ask you what on earth it is now as well.

> > USE="-X -arts -apache2 -berkdb -cups -dri -eds -esd -gdbm -gnome
> > -gstreamer -gtk -gpm -xmms 3dnow acl bash-completion bzip2 fbcon hal lzo
> > mbox mmx nsplugin nvidia offensive sse svga tiff urandom"
> >
> > -X because I don't every application to be built with X support, -arts
> > because of the same reason.. The applications that i think will need X
> > support I add a line like this to /etc/portage/package.use
>
> so you want to break douzends of packages for him? Why? -dri? Maybe he
> needs it? fbcon? Why? who needs it? You are telling him to deactivate
> usefull stuff and activate useless? Great!

Yeah, but I don't usually go through and add stuff to package.use.

> > Remember, always add the minimum USE flags you need to /etc/make.conf,
> > you should always tune your system to specific packages by adding USE
> > flags to be used for the specific package to /etc/portage/package.use
>
> oh, yeah, increase the work and risk subtle breakage here and there ....

I agree with minimal USE flags, but I just don't know which ones I can get 
away with disabling.  So I go cautiously.  It's saved me much pain.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:57, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 11:51 pm, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > > 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
> >
> > no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If
> > you want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.
>
> Why I asked before doing.  What is it?
>

it hiddes some symbols in libs. It can make startup a lot faster, but it can 
also break a lot of things. 
prelink is much saver ...

> > > > MAKEOPTS=""
> > >
> > > 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"
> >
> > -j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the compiling
> > is running in the background.
>
> Okay.  That sounds non-violate.
>
> > > > USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb
> > > > bitmap-fonts bzip2 cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri
> > > > dvd dvdread elibc_glibc emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam
> > > > fastbuild foomaticdb
> > > > force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm
> > > > gstreamer gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg
> > > > java javascript kde kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad
> > > > memlimit mikmod mhash mng motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls
> > > > nptl ogg opengl oss pam pcre pdflib perl png posix python qt
> > > > quicktime readline samba sdl session simplexml slang soap sockets
> > > > spell spl ssl sse sse2 svg tcltk tcpd tiff tokenizer truetype
> > > > truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb udev userland_GNU vorbis x86 xml xml2
> > > > xmms xsl xv zlib"
> > >
> > > Do you really need all these USE flags and features? I think not.. Add
> > > USE flags that really are useful not add them just because they might
> > > become useful sometime.. The more features you have in your packages,
> > > the slower and more memory hungry they are.. Take a look at my USE
> > > flags..
> >
> > you think - but you don't know what he wants and needs.
>
> I didn't change many from the defaults because I didn't know what most of
> them were.  If it ain't broke don't fix it.
>
> > btw, I would emerge ufed and work down the list....
>
> I'll emerge it now, and ask you what on earth it is now as well.

ufed

use flag editor

When you start it, you see all useflags listed, if it is active (X before its 
name),  where it is set (the space in the brackets behind the name) and the 
description of the flag. man ufed has the details ;)

Just read the descriptions and decide.. easy.
If you are not sure about disabling something, leave it in the default state.

make an emerge --newuse --ask world after you have finished.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1949 bytes --]

On Thursday 04 May 2006 04:42 am, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:57, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday 01 May 2006 11:51 pm, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > > > 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
> > >
> > > no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If
> > > you want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.
> >
> > Why I asked before doing.  What is it?
>
> it hiddes some symbols in libs. It can make startup a lot faster, but it
> can also break a lot of things.
> prelink is much saver ...

Okay... whatever that is.  If this is going to destabilize my system I'm not 
going to do it...

> > > btw, I would emerge ufed and work down the list....
> >
> > I'll emerge it now, and ask you what on earth it is now as well.
>
> ufed
>
> use flag editor

Hah... I knew that!  (not!)

> When you start it, you see all useflags listed, if it is active (X before
> its name),  where it is set (the space in the brackets behind the name) and
> the description of the flag. man ufed has the details ;)

So it's like make menuconfig in /usr/src/linux?

> Just read the descriptions and decide.. easy.
> If you are not sure about disabling something, leave it in the default
> state.

Yup.

> make an emerge --newuse --ask world after you have finished.

I'm not doing that again!  Last time I tried that....  one night, all day 
long, and it only did 38 of 283 packages or something.  It was *horrible.*

Next time I try that, I'll totally exit KDE and do it 100% from the command 
line so as to make sure every single last shred of memory is there to do it.  
Even then, it'll be over a very long vacation.

However, I will start perfecting my setting now, so that when I update/install 
new things they reflect changes to make the system faster!

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Walter Dnes]

On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 09:15:03PM -0700, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote

> > make an emerge --newuse --ask world after you have finished.
> 
> I'm not doing that again!  Last time I tried that....  one night,
> all day long, and it only did 38 of 283 packages or something.
> It was *horrible.*
> 
> Next time I try that, I'll totally exit KDE and do it 100% from the
> command line so as to make sure every single last shred of memory
> is there to do it.  Even then, it'll be over a very long vacation.
> 
> However, I will start perfecting my setting now, so that when I
> update/install new things they reflect changes to make the system
> faster!

  The final USE settings are a combination of system defaults and your
USE variable.  In your case it's...

USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts bzip2
cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri dvd dvdread elibc_glibc
emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam fastbuild foomaticdb
force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm gstreamer
gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg java javascript kde
kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad memlimit mikmod mhash mng
motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl ogg opengl oss pam pcre
pdflib perl png posix python qt quicktime readline samba sdl session
simplexml slang soap sockets spell spl ssl sse sse2 svg tcltk tcpd tiff
tokenizer truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb udev userland_GNU vorbis
x86 xml xml2 xmms xsl xv zlib"

  Note that USE controls *OPTIONAL* stuff.  If package A *REQUIRES*
package B, "emerge A" will attempt to build package B first regardless
of what you put in USE.  Optional stuff means additional functionality.
E.g. you can build gimp with "-jpeg -tiff" and it'll still handle other
types of graphics.  The "mmx sse" flags speed up computations by any app
that can use it.  Those apps will still run with "-mmx -sse", but slower.

  Let's just say that I strongly disagree with some of the defaults that
the developers have chosen.  There is a way to take matters into your
own hands, and over-ride the defaults.  That is done by putting "-*" at
the beginning of USE, like so...
USE="-*"

and then adding only the stuff that you need.  In your case, you may
find it easier to re-install from scratch one of these days.  I'll deal
with the flags in functional groups.  Here are my settings.  Yours may
vary depending on your hardware ("3dnow" is AMD-specific) and any
programs that require specific settings.

USE="-* 3dnow X a52 aac alsa bzip2 cdr dga dio divx4linux dri dvd dvdr
dvdread encode exif ffmpeg flac fortran gb gif gtk2 imlib jpeg maildir
mikmod mime mmap mmx mng mp3 mpeg ncurses nptl nptlonly nsplugin
offensive ogg opengl plotutils png posix quicktime readline sdl
sharedmem slang sockets sse sse2 theora threads tiff truetype vcd vorbis
win32codecs wmf xpm xv zlib"

  In addition, I have some custom settings in /etc/portage/package.use

##########################
app-emulation/qemu softmmu
app-misc/mc -X
app-mobilephone/gnokii sms

# If it doesn't have the "motif" flag, xpdf only installs its libs,
# but *NOT* the executable... oops.
app-text/xpdf motif
media-gfx/gimp doc
media-gfx/imagemagick doc
media-libs/win32codecs real
media-video/mplayer custom-cflags i8x0 real 3dnowext mmxext
net-misc/wget ssl
net-nntp/slrn uudeview

# Greatly cuts down on multi-lingual garbage
sys-libs/glibc userlocales
www-client/w3m -X -imlib

x11-base/xorg-x11 bitmap-fonts font-server truetype-fonts type1-fonts

# If it's going to be a rescue package, it damn well better work
# standalone when libraries get screwed up.
sys-apps/busybox static
##########################


-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> In linux /sbin/init is Job #1
My musings on technology and security at http://tech_sec.blog.ca
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 5092 bytes --]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> 
> 
> > 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
> >
> 
> no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If you 
> want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.

According to http://gentoo-wiki.com/CFLAGS_matrix
-fvisibility-inlines-hidden is recommended especially for KDE users..
Atleast while KDE it does not effect and is indeed recommended..

 
> 
> > > MAKEOPTS=""
> >
> > 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"
> 
> -j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the compiling is 
> running in the background. 

No for singlecore/single cpu computer, -j2 is recommended.. Read
MAKEOPTS section in:

  http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=1&chap=5#doc_chap5

> 
> >
> > > ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=""
> 
> >
> > Also if you wish add these lines to /etc/make.conf
> >
> > 	LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,-z,now,--sort-common"
> 
> are you totally sure, that this do not break something? do this flags bring 
> anything, that can not be archived with prelink?
> 
> Again, you might want to use them, but you should not tell somebody else to 
> use them.-

Honestly I think I was wrong in recommending this.. But during the
emerge process of some packages there's a suggestion to use at least a 
part of the LDFLAGS quoted above.. It's like a security warning.. I
decided to use these flags after reading a lot about them in Gentoo
forms

> 
> >
> > > USE=" X a52 aac alsa apache2 acpi arts audiofile avi berkdb bitmap-fonts
> > > bzip2 cdr cli crypt ctype cups dba eds directfb doc dri dvd dvdread
> > > elibc_glibc emboss encode esd ethereal exif expat fam fastbuild
> > > foomaticdb
> > > force-cgi-redirect fortran ftp gd gcj gdbm gif glut gmp gnome gpm
> > > gstreamer gtk gtk2 gtkhtml guile hal hardened idn imlib ipv6 jpeg java
> > > javascript kde kdexdeltas kernel_linux lcms libg++ libwww mad memlimit
> > > mikmod mhash mng motif mozilla mime mmx mp3 mpeg ncurses nls nptl ogg
> > > opengl oss pam pcre pdflib perl png posix python qt quicktime readline
> > > samba sdl session simplexml slang soap sockets spell spl ssl sse sse2 svg
> > > tcltk tcpd tiff tokenizer truetype truetype-fonts type1-fonts usb udev
> > > userland_GNU vorbis x86 xml xml2 xmms xsl xv zlib"
> >
> > Do you really need all these USE flags and features? I think not.. Add
> > USE flags that really are useful not add them just because they might
> > become useful sometime.. The more features you have in your packages,
> > the slower and more memory hungry they are.. Take a look at my USE
> > flags..
> 
> you think - but you don't know what he wants and needs.
> 
> btw, I would emerge ufed and work down the list....

I've never used ufed, but after reading bout it now I think it's better
than manually editing.. Regardless of what way one chooses to select USE
flags I believe one must select the USE flags that are necessary..
The more features you got the more memory bloat it becomes..

> 
> >
> > USE="-X -arts -apache2 -berkdb -cups -dri -eds -esd -gdbm -gnome
> > -gstreamer -gtk -gpm -xmms 3dnow acl bash-completion bzip2 fbcon hal lzo
> > mbox mmx nsplugin nvidia offensive sse svga tiff urandom"
> >
> > -X because I don't every application to be built with X support, -arts
> > because of the same reason.. The applications that i think will need X
> > support I add a line like this to /etc/portage/package.use
> 
> so you want to break douzends of packages for him? Why? -dri? Maybe he needs 
> it? fbcon? Why? who needs it? You are telling him to deactivate usefull stuff 
> and activate useless? Great!

I didn't recommend this to him.. You have misquoted me.. You missed the
sentence which said "Take a look at my USE flags".. These USE flags are
mine and I quoted them just to explain how to edit these files.. I don't
know what his system is so cant recommend the USE flags..

> 
> 
> > 	VIDEO_CARDS="<your video card" #like nvidia, ati
> that is not needed anymore. Look into the use descriptions. Or even better, 
> get familiar with ufed.

If you use Xorg-7.0 it is useful.. (Also xine if I remember correctly(?))

> 
> 
> > Remember, always add the minimum USE flags you need to /etc/make.conf,
> > you should always tune your system to specific packages by adding USE
> > flags to be used for the specific package to /etc/portage/package.use
> 
> oh, yeah, increase the work and risk subtle breakage here and there ....

There's always a risk when it comes to fine tuning your system that it
may break things.. You've to pay the price experimenting.. If you are
not brave enough the default are good, but performance will not match
the fine tuned machine (Although I'm sure the performance gain is not 
worth the trouble, but the learning experience is worth)

Bye,
Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 12:42, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > > 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
> >
> > no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If
> > you want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.
>
> According to http://gentoo-wiki.com/CFLAGS_matrix
> -fvisibility-inlines-hidden is recommended especially for KDE users..
> Atleast while KDE it does not effect and is indeed recommended..

and if I remember right, there was some KDE breakage with this flag. No?

gentoo-wiki is not an official gentoo project ;)
And a wiki can be edited by everybody.


http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED&field0-0-0=product&type0-0-0=substring&value0-0-0=fvisibility-inlines-hidden&field0-0-1=component&type0-0-1=substring&value0-0-1=fvisibility-inlines-hidden&field0-0-2=short_desc&type0-0-2=substring&value0-0-2=fvisibility-inlines-hidden&field0-0-3=status_whiteboard&type0-0-3=substring&value0-0-3=fvisibility-inlines-hidden

>
> > > > MAKEOPTS=""
> > >
> > > 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"
> >
> > -j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the compiling
> > is running in the background.
>
> No for singlecore/single cpu computer, -j2 is recommended.. Read
> MAKEOPTS section in:

really? with -j2 my box crawls when compiling, sometimes even oom. With -j1 I 
can use it, as if nothing happens and I don't get oom. Plus - it is not 
slower.
I have read the sections, I suffered from -j2 and I stopped using it. All 
better now.
Btw, since switching between tasks and threads is something CPUs really hate, 
I can't even imagine how increasing the amount of needed switches should 
help.

> > > Also if you wish add these lines to /etc/make.conf
> > >
> > > 	LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,-z,now,--sort-common"
> >
> > are you totally sure, that this do not break something? do this flags
> > bring anything, that can not be archived with prelink?
> >
> > Again, you might want to use them, but you should not tell somebody else
> > to use them.-
>
> Honestly I think I was wrong in recommending this.. But during the
> emerge process of some packages there's a suggestion to use at least a
> part of the LDFLAGS quoted above.. It's like a security warning.. I
> decided to use these flags after reading a lot about them in Gentoo
> forms

yes, but everything in the forums should be taken with a grain of salt - a lot 
of ricers are there. It is safer to look into bugs.gentoo.org ;)



> >
> > so you want to break douzends of packages for him? Why? -dri? Maybe he
> > needs it? fbcon? Why? who needs it? You are telling him to deactivate
> > usefull stuff and activate useless? Great!
>
> I didn't recommend this to him.. You have misquoted me.. You missed the
> sentence which said "Take a look at my USE flags".. These USE flags are
> mine and I quoted them just to explain how to edit these files.. I don't
> know what his system is so cant recommend the USE flags..
>
> > > 	VIDEO_CARDS="<your video card" #like nvidia, ati
> >
> > that is not needed anymore. Look into the use descriptions. Or even
> > better, get familiar with ufed.
>
> If you use Xorg-7.0 it is useful.. (Also xine if I remember correctly(?))
>
> > > Remember, always add the minimum USE flags you need to /etc/make.conf,
> > > you should always tune your system to specific packages by adding USE
> > > flags to be used for the specific package to /etc/portage/package.use
> >
> > oh, yeah, increase the work and risk subtle breakage here and there ....
>
> There's always a risk when it comes to fine tuning your system that it
> may break things.. You've to pay the price experimenting.. If you are
> not brave enough the default are good, but performance will not match
> the fine tuned machine (Although I'm sure the performance gain is not
> worth the trouble, but the learning experience is worth)

an example:
a lot of packages compiled against esd, as soon as it was installed, even with 
the -esd useflag.

So one package that had esd as its flags and installed esd, would contaminate 
a lof of others. Unmerge esd and suddenly you may have very funny results (or 
not so funny). And esd was the harmless example.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3372 bytes --]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Friday 05 May 2006 12:42, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > > On Tuesday 02 May 2006 08:18, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > > > 	CXXFLAGS="${CFLAGS} -fvisibility-inlines-hidden"
> > >
> > > no, just no. This breaks enough stuff. Do not tell others to use it. If
> > > you want to use it. Fine. But do not tell anybody else to do it.
> >
> > According to http://gentoo-wiki.com/CFLAGS_matrix
> > -fvisibility-inlines-hidden is recommended especially for KDE users..
> > Atleast while KDE it does not effect and is indeed recommended..
> 
> and if I remember right, there was some KDE breakage with this flag. No?
> 
> gentoo-wiki is not an official gentoo project ;)
> And a wiki can be edited by everybody.
> 
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/buglist.cgi?bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED&field0-0-0=product&type0-0-0=substring&value0-0-0=fvisibility-inlines-hidden&field0-0-1=component&type0-0-1=substring&value0-0-1=fvisibility-inlines-hidden&field0-0-2=short_desc&type0-0-2=substring&value0-0-2=fvisibility-inlines-hidden&field0-0-3=status_whiteboard&type0-0-3=substring&value0-0-3=fvisibility-inlines-hidden

Thanks for the pointer.. I take my word back about
-fvisibility-inlines-hidden being a safe option for KDE.

> 
> >
> > > > > MAKEOPTS=""
> > > >
> > > > 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"
> > >
> > > -j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the compiling
> > > is running in the background.
> >
> > No for singlecore/single cpu computer, -j2 is recommended.. Read
> > MAKEOPTS section in:
> 
> really? with -j2 my box crawls when compiling, sometimes even oom. With -j1 I 
> can use it, as if nothing happens and I don't get oom. Plus - it is not 
> slower.
> I have read the sections, I suffered from -j2 and I stopped using it. All 
> better now.
> Btw, since switching between tasks and threads is something CPUs really hate, 
> I can't even imagine how increasing the amount of needed switches should 
> help.
> 

Al least Gentoo Handbook is a official Gentoo project and they recommend
it.. :)

> > > > Also if you wish add these lines to /etc/make.conf
> > > >
> > > > 	LDFLAGS="-Wl,-O1,-z,now,--sort-common"
> > >
> > > are you totally sure, that this do not break something? do this flags
> > > bring anything, that can not be archived with prelink?
> > >
> > > Again, you might want to use them, but you should not tell somebody else
> > > to use them.-
> >
> > Honestly I think I was wrong in recommending this.. But during the
> > emerge process of some packages there's a suggestion to use at least a
> > part of the LDFLAGS quoted above.. It's like a security warning.. I
> > decided to use these flags after reading a lot about them in Gentoo
> > forms
> 
> yes, but everything in the forums should be taken with a grain of salt - a lot 
> of ricers are there. It is safer to look into bugs.gentoo.org ;)

It's true but after doing a bit of research I think they are stable
enough to use.. I don't use all the fancy stuff they post in forums..

> (snip)

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 13:17, Farhan Ahmed wrote:

> > > > > > MAKEOPTS=""
> > > > >
> > > > > 	MAKEOPTS="-j2"
> > > >
> > > > -j1 is a good one for singlecore/single cpu computer, where the
> > > > compiling is running in the background.
> > >
> > > No for singlecore/single cpu computer, -j2 is recommended.. Read
> > > MAKEOPTS section in:
> >
> > really? with -j2 my box crawls when compiling, sometimes even oom. With
> > -j1 I can use it, as if nothing happens and I don't get oom. Plus - it is
> > not slower.
> > I have read the sections, I suffered from -j2 and I stopped using it. All
> > better now.
> > Btw, since switching between tasks and threads is something CPUs really
> > hate, I can't even imagine how increasing the amount of needed switches
> > should help.
>
> Al least Gentoo Handbook is a official Gentoo project and they recommend
> it.. :)

that is true, but still, for me it works a lot better, if I use -j1.

The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not compile 
because of ooms.

with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as with -j2.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 985 bytes --]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not compile 
> because of ooms.
> 
> with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as with -j2.

This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?

PS: Your quote in previous message about gentoo-wiki is not true..
Although I agree that the Flags I quoted were unstable, you cannot say
gentoo-wiki cannot be trusted just because it can be edited by anyone..
If you are true then you cannot trust any Free Software because it too
can be edited.. Agreed that someone might post wrong info, but it's even
more likely that someone will recognize it and correct it.. This is the
beauty of open source..

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:49:29 +0530 Farhan Ahmed
<farhanahmed06@gmail.com> wrote:

> > The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not
> > compile because of ooms.
> > 
> > with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as
> > with -j2.
> 
> This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
> functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?

Not really. GCC does eat some memory, but it's not that worse. Well,
this does absolutely depend on RAM+Swap. Whenever I had oom conditions
in the past 4 years, that was because of a leaky, long-running
application. I've yet to see a gcc process that claims 100MB of
physical memory. I did see Apache eat such an amount of mem after
running some days and calling leaky skripts (integrated as a module, of
course).

Another way to get OOMs here would probably to limit maximum memory
usage too much.

The only thing that breaks -j<N> for make are Makefiles that base on
broken assumptions. Those Makefiles are buggy and to be reported.

Running -j<N> for N>1 on a UP machine won't likely bring too much
speed. It may have some small positive effects due to better
distribution of IO load and process creation. That's the real culprit
when compiling: Lots of context switches for each make process. So what
probably gives a little more speed is setting the scheduler HZ value to
>100 (but this isn't the default any more). "vmstat" is a good tool to
>monitor the amount of context switches.


-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 16:06, Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On Fri, 5 May 2006 18:49:29 +0530 Farhan Ahmed
>
> <farhanahmed06@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not
> > > compile because of ooms.
> > >
> > > with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as
> > > with -j2.
> >
> > This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
> > functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?
>
> Not really. GCC does eat some memory, but it's not that worse. Well,
> this does absolutely depend on RAM+Swap. Whenever I had oom conditions
> in the past 4 years, that was because of a leaky, long-running
> application. I've yet to see a gcc process that claims 100MB of
> physical memory. I did see Apache eat such an amount of mem after
> running some days and calling leaky skripts (integrated as a module, of
> course).
>

on AMD64 compiling kdepim or wesnoth, there are structures created, that takes 
700mb and more. And this is not even swappable.

So with 1gig of ram, you can run into ooms.

I had enough of them. Even on a fresh booted system with nothing running than 
the emerge process. That has nothing to do with flaky applications, just much 
ram needed by gcc.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

This is an example:

[ 1151.984763] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2, order=0
[ 1151.984767] Mem-info:
[ 1151.984770] DMA per-cpu:
[ 1151.984772] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:3
[ 1151.984775] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[ 1151.984776] Normal per-cpu:
[ 1151.984779] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:98
[ 1151.984781] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:32
[ 1151.984783] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[ 1151.984786] Free pages:        5520kB (0kB HighMem)
[ 1151.984790] Active:117324 inactive:1252 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1380 slab:4119 mapped:117651 pagetables:562
[ 1151.984794] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10436kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10623 all_unreclaimable? yes
[ 1151.984797] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[ 1151.984802] Normal free:3452kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:458860kB inactive:5008kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[ 1151.984805] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[ 1151.984809] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[ 1151.984811] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[ 1151.984813] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[ 1151.984820] Normal: 113*4kB 21*8kB 7*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3452kB
[ 1151.984827] HighMem: empty
[ 1151.984829] Swap cache: add 71, delete 71, find 0/0, race 0+0
[ 1151.984831] Free swap  = 995736kB
[ 1151.984833] Total swap = 996020kB
[ 1151.984834] Free swap:       995736kB
[ 1151.988117] 130992 pages of RAM
[ 1151.988119] 3265 reserved pages
[ 1151.988121] 24332 pages shared
[ 1151.988122] 0 pages swap cached
[ 1151.988154] Out of Memory: Killed process 8716 (cc1plus).
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-user] OOM-Killer upon compilation/emerge on AMD64 (was: Re: why firefox is so slow?)

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Fri, 5 May 2006 17:28:06 +0200 "Hemmann, Volker Armin"
<volker.armin.hemmann@tu-clausthal.de> wrote:

> This is an example:
> 
> [ 1151.984763] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2, order=0

Huh? If I understand Linux' memory management correctly that says that
the OOM condition was triggered by trying to reserve 1 page (order=0)
of high memory (gfp_mask|0x0002). But: You don't have highmem (of
course, because you're running on 64bit).

> [ 1151.984770] DMA per-cpu:

what about DMA32? Is this an older kernel?

> [ 1151.984809] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no

doesn't make me wonder on 64bit...

> [ 1151.984829] Swap cache: add 71, delete 71, find 0/0, race 0+0
> [ 1151.984831] Free swap  = 995736kB
> [ 1151.984833] Total swap = 996020kB
> [ 1151.984834] Free swap:       995736kB

Errr, that basically says nearly full swap space is available, isn't it?

I think you probably have some IO related driver that for whatever
reason decides to claim highmem. This triggers the OOM (there's no
highmem), and cc1plus just happens to be the most interesting task to
kill for the kernel:
- just started,
- much memory recovered

Further analysis would probably require patching the mm/oom_kill.c and
inserting a few debug statements -- if the problem is still there for
newest kernels (there's been some changes esp. reg. AMD64 in 2.6.14,
IIRC).


-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] OOM-Killer upon compilation/emerge on AMD64 (was: Re: why firefox is so slow?)

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 18:43, Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:

> > [ 1151.984829] Swap cache: add 71, delete 71, find 0/0, race 0+0
> > [ 1151.984831] Free swap  = 995736kB
> > [ 1151.984833] Total swap = 996020kB
> > [ 1151.984834] Free swap:    995736kB
>
> Errr, that basically says nearly full swap space is available, isn't it?
>

no, that says, that of roughly one gb, roughly one gb was free, when the oom 
happened.

> I think you probably have some IO related driver that for whatever
> reason decides to claim highmem. This triggers the OOM (there's no
> highmem), and cc1plus just happens to be the most interesting task to
> kill for the kernel:

no, I had this often enough.

The thing is really easy: on amd64 compiling kdepim or wesnoth can end in one 
single make instance need ~700mb of ram for a big construct.
If you have two instances and only 1gb, oom will go wild.

The example was from kdepim, btw.

Here is another one, were the oom killer was really on a rampage:

[14190.755961] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2, order=0
[14190.755966] Mem-info:
[14190.755968] DMA per-cpu:
[14190.755970] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:2
[14190.755973] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[14190.755974] Normal per-cpu:
[14190.755977] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:87
[14190.755979] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:31
[14190.755981] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[14190.755984] Free pages:        5100kB (0kB HighMem)
[14190.755988] Active:99458 inactive:16552 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1275 slab:5237 mapped:114743 pagetables:1681
[14190.755993] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:9968kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:11428 all_unreclaimable? yes
[14190.755996] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[14190.756000] Normal free:3032kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:387864kB inactive:66208kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[14190.756004] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[14190.756007] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[14190.756010] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[14190.756012] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[14190.756019] Normal: 0*4kB 33*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3032kB
[14190.756025] HighMem: empty
[14190.756028] Swap cache: add 71448, delete 65168, find 4559/6507, race 0+0
[14190.756030] Free swap  = 770044kB
[14190.756032] Total swap = 996020kB
[14190.756034] Free swap:       770044kB
[14190.759136] 130992 pages of RAM
[14190.759139] 3282 reserved pages
[14190.759141] 134016 pages shared
[14190.759143] 6280 pages swap cached
[14190.759202] Out of Memory: Killed process 16362 (java).
[14509.475810] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[14509.475814] Mem-info:
[14509.475816] DMA per-cpu:
[14509.475819] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:4
[14509.475821] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[14509.475823] Normal per-cpu:
[14509.475826] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:68
[14509.475828] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:54
[14509.475830] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[14509.475833] Free pages:        5008kB (0kB HighMem)
[14509.475837] Active:113415 inactive:3219 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1252 slab:4835 mapped:115538 pagetables:1541
[14509.475842] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10252kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10743 all_unreclaimable? yes
[14509.475845] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[14509.475849] Normal free:2940kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:443408kB inactive:12876kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[14509.475853] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[14509.475856] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[14509.475859] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[14509.475861] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[14509.475867] Normal: 1*4kB 23*8kB 4*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2940kB
[14509.475874] HighMem: empty
[14509.475877] Swap cache: add 92036, delete 85042, find 9890/13129, race 0+0
[14509.475879] Free swap  = 757972kB
[14509.475881] Total swap = 996020kB
[14509.475883] Free swap:       757972kB
[14509.478961] 130992 pages of RAM
[14509.478963] 3282 reserved pages
[14509.478964] 122253 pages shared
[14509.478966] 6994 pages swap cached
[14509.479022] Out of Memory: Killed process 8398 (java).
[15001.297389] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2, order=0
[15001.297393] Mem-info:
[15001.297395] DMA per-cpu:
[15001.297398] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:3
[15001.297400] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[15001.297402] Normal per-cpu:
[15001.297404] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:146
[15001.297407] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:32
[15001.297409] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[15001.297412] Free pages:        5004kB (0kB HighMem)
[15001.297416] Active:100152 inactive:15972 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1251 slab:4971 mapped:115200 pagetables:1789
[15001.297421] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10196kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10628 all_unreclaimable? yes
[15001.297423] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[15001.297428] Normal free:2936kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:390412kB inactive:63888kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[15001.297431] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[15001.297435] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[15001.297438] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[15001.297440] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[15001.297446] Normal: 62*4kB 0*8kB 0*16kB 2*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2936kB
[15001.297453] HighMem: empty
[15001.297456] Swap cache: add 111793, delete 98036, find 20075/26180, race 
0+0
[15001.297459] Free swap  = 779808kB
[15001.297460] Total swap = 996020kB
[15001.297462] Free swap:       779808kB
[15001.300647] 130992 pages of RAM
[15001.300649] 3282 reserved pages
[15001.300651] 147598 pages shared
[15001.300652] 13757 pages swap cached
[15001.300714] Out of Memory: Killed process 11518 (java).
[15060.965935] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[15060.965940] Mem-info:
[15060.965942] DMA per-cpu:
[15060.965945] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:3
[15060.965948] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[15060.965949] Normal per-cpu:
[15060.965952] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:65
[15060.965954] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:54
[15060.965956] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[15060.965959] Free pages:        5184kB (0kB HighMem)
[15060.965963] Active:89073 inactive:27221 dirty:0 writeback:234 unstable:0 
free:1296 slab:4820 mapped:115130 pagetables:1809
[15060.965968] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10260kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10366 all_unreclaimable? yes
[15060.965971] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[15060.965976] Normal free:3116kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:346032kB inactive:108884kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:415 
all_unreclaimable? no
[15060.965979] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[15060.965982] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[15060.965985] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[15060.965987] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[15060.965994] Normal: 29*4kB 11*8kB 12*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3116kB
[15060.966000] HighMem: empty
[15060.966004] Swap cache: add 121582, delete 109470, find 20540/26826, race 
0+0
[15060.966006] Free swap  = 744824kB
[15060.966008] Total swap = 996020kB
[15060.966009] Free swap:       744824kB
[15060.969400] 130992 pages of RAM
[15060.969402] 3282 reserved pages
[15060.969404] 145398 pages shared
[15060.969405] 12112 pages swap cached
[15060.969465] Out of Memory: Killed process 15435 (java).
[16399.737605] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2, order=0
[16399.737609] Mem-info:
[16399.737612] DMA per-cpu:
[16399.737614] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:2
[16399.737617] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[16399.737619] Normal per-cpu:
[16399.737621] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:95
[16399.737623] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:49
[16399.737625] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[16399.737628] Free pages:        5016kB (0kB HighMem)
[16399.737632] Active:2565 inactive:113639 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1254 slab:5070 mapped:115248 pagetables:1712
[16399.737637] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10260kB 
inactive:4kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:13785 all_unreclaimable? yes
[16399.737640] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[16399.737645] Normal free:2948kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB active:0kB 
inactive:454552kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:610972 all_unreclaimable? 
yes
[16399.737648] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[16399.737651] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[16399.737654] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[16399.737656] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[16399.737663] Normal: 55*4kB 5*8kB 0*16kB 2*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2948kB
[16399.737669] HighMem: empty
[16399.737672] Swap cache: add 152484, delete 137323, find 36699/46949, race 
0+0
[16399.737675] Free swap  = 770452kB
[16399.737676] Total swap = 996020kB
[16399.737678] Free swap:       770452kB
[16399.740821] 130992 pages of RAM
[16399.740823] 3282 reserved pages
[16399.740825] 124968 pages shared
[16399.740826] 15161 pages swap cached
[16399.740887] Out of Memory: Killed process 27424 (java).
[16399.836512] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[16399.836516] Mem-info:
[16399.836518] DMA per-cpu:
[16399.836521] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:2
[16399.836523] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[16399.836525] Normal per-cpu:
[16399.836527] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:64
[16399.836530] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:60
[16399.836531] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[16399.836534] Free pages:        5020kB (0kB HighMem)
[16399.836538] Active:2697 inactive:113540 dirty:3 writeback:823 unstable:0 
free:1255 slab:5088 mapped:114449 pagetables:1712
[16399.836543] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10260kB 
inactive:4kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:13785 all_unreclaimable? yes
[16399.836546] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[16399.836551] Normal free:2952kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:528kB inactive:454156kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:33 
all_unreclaimable? no
[16399.836554] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[16399.836557] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[16399.836560] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[16399.836562] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[16399.836569] Normal: 42*4kB 10*8kB 1*16kB 2*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2952kB
[16399.836575] HighMem: empty
[16399.836578] Swap cache: add 153239, delete 137323, find 36699/46950, race 
0+0
[16399.836581] Free swap  = 767436kB
[16399.836582] Total swap = 996020kB
[16399.836584] Free swap:       767436kB
[16399.839833] 130992 pages of RAM
[16399.839836] 3282 reserved pages
[16399.839837] 124796 pages shared
[16399.839839] 15916 pages swap cached
[16399.839891] Out of Memory: Killed process 27435 (java).
[18015.861623] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[18015.861627] Mem-info:
[18015.861629] DMA per-cpu:
[18015.861632] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:2
[18015.861634] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[18015.861636] Normal per-cpu:
[18015.861639] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:69
[18015.861641] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:37
[18015.861643] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[18015.861646] Free pages:        6068kB (0kB HighMem)
[18015.861650] Active:111495 inactive:4129 dirty:0 writeback:14 unstable:0 
free:1517 slab:4986 mapped:114649 pagetables:2028
[18015.861654] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:9984kB 
inactive:4kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10392 all_unreclaimable? yes
[18015.861657] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[18015.861662] Normal free:4000kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:435996kB inactive:16512kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[18015.861665] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[18015.861669] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[18015.861672] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[18015.861673] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[18015.861680] Normal: 208*4kB 24*8kB 8*16kB 5*32kB 2*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 4000kB
[18015.861687] HighMem: empty
[18015.861690] Swap cache: add 188122, delete 160635, find 55603/70024, race 
0+0
[18015.861693] Free swap  = 741476kB
[18015.861694] Total swap = 996020kB
[18015.861696] Free swap:       741476kB
[18015.864849] 130992 pages of RAM
[18015.864851] 3282 reserved pages
[18015.864853] 151018 pages shared
[18015.864854] 27487 pages swap cached
[18015.864921] Out of Memory: Killed process 21573 (java).
[20154.955648] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[20154.955652] Mem-info:
[20154.955655] DMA per-cpu:
[20154.955657] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:2
[20154.955660] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[20154.955662] Normal per-cpu:
[20154.955664] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:94
[20154.955666] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:52
[20154.955668] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[20154.955671] Free pages:        4996kB (0kB HighMem)
[20154.955675] Active:57513 inactive:59707 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1249 slab:4734 mapped:116005 pagetables:1193
[20154.955680] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10176kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10338 all_unreclaimable? yes
[20154.955683] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[20154.955688] Normal free:2928kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:219876kB inactive:238828kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[20154.955691] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[20154.955694] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[20154.955697] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[20154.955699] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[20154.955706] Normal: 6*4kB 29*8kB 1*16kB 1*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2928kB
[20154.955712] HighMem: empty
[20154.955716] Swap cache: add 250146, delete 222527, find 87777/108247, race 
0+0
[20154.955718] Free swap  = 750780kB
[20154.955720] Total swap = 996020kB
[20154.955721] Free swap:       750780kB
[20154.958923] 130992 pages of RAM
[20154.958925] 3282 reserved pages
[20154.958927] 83773 pages shared
[20154.958928] 27619 pages swap cached
[20154.958971] Out of Memory: Killed process 15902 (klauncher).
[20180.803004] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x80d2, order=0
[20180.803009] Mem-info:
[20180.803011] DMA per-cpu:
[20180.803014] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:5
[20180.803016] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[20180.803018] Normal per-cpu:
[20180.803021] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:99
[20180.803023] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:57
[20180.803025] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[20180.803028] Free pages:        5028kB (0kB HighMem)
[20180.803032] Active:117255 inactive:293 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1257 slab:4292 mapped:116679 pagetables:1279
[20180.803037] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10196kB 
inactive:0kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:10381 all_unreclaimable? yes
[20180.803040] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[20180.803045] Normal free:2960kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:458824kB inactive:1172kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:504143 
all_unreclaimable? yes
[20180.803048] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[20180.803051] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[20180.803054] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[20180.803056] DMA: 1*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[20180.803063] Normal: 30*4kB 9*8kB 5*16kB 2*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2960kB
[20180.803069] HighMem: empty
[20180.803073] Swap cache: add 259272, delete 253105, find 88674/109651, race 
0+0
[20180.803075] Free swap  = 727052kB
[20180.803077] Total swap = 996020kB
[20180.803078] Free swap:       727052kB
[20180.806423] 130992 pages of RAM
[20180.806425] 3282 reserved pages
[20180.806427] 68286 pages shared
[20180.806429] 6167 pages swap cached
[20180.806471] Out of Memory: Killed process 15921 (kwin).
[20191.658940] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x201d2, order=0
[20191.658943] Mem-info:
[20191.658945] DMA per-cpu:
[20191.658948] cpu 0 hot: low 2, high 6, batch 1 used:2
[20191.658950] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 2, batch 1 used:1
[20191.658952] Normal per-cpu:
[20191.658954] cpu 0 hot: low 62, high 186, batch 31 used:69
[20191.658957] cpu 0 cold: low 0, high 62, batch 31 used:21
[20191.658959] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[20191.658961] Free pages:        5084kB (0kB HighMem)
[20191.658965] Active:95402 inactive:22296 dirty:0 writeback:1567 unstable:0 
free:1271 slab:4247 mapped:115128 pagetables:1248
[20191.658970] DMA free:2068kB min:88kB low:108kB high:132kB active:10156kB 
inactive:12kB present:15996kB pages_scanned:11646 all_unreclaimable? yes
[20191.658973] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 495 495
[20191.658978] Normal free:3016kB min:2800kB low:3500kB high:4200kB 
active:371452kB inactive:89172kB present:507584kB pages_scanned:0 
all_unreclaimable? no
[20191.658981] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[20191.658984] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:160kB high:192kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[20191.658987] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0
[20191.658989] DMA: 3*4kB 1*8kB 0*16kB 0*32kB 0*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 0*512kB 
0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 2068kB
[20191.658996] Normal: 60*4kB 3*8kB 0*16kB 4*32kB 1*64kB 0*128kB 0*256kB 
1*512kB 0*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3016kB
[20191.659002] HighMem: empty
[20191.659005] Swap cache: add 281361, delete 268246, find 95464/118677, race 
0+0
[20191.659008] Free swap  = 692660kB
[20191.659009] Total swap = 996020kB
[20191.659011] Free swap:       692660kB
[20191.661185] 130992 pages of RAM
[20191.661187] 3265 reserved pages
[20191.661188] 62187 pages shared
[20191.661190] 13115 pages swap cached
[20191.661218] Out of Memory: Killed process 15930 (konsole).


or this one (kernel 2.6.16_rc6):
32663.239377] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[32663.239381]
[32663.239382] Call Trace: <ffffffff8014fece>{out_of_memory+62} 
<ffffffff80151115>{__alloc_pages+549}
[32663.239415]        <ffffffff801511e4>{__get_free_pages+52} 
<ffffffff8017df2a>{__pollwait+74}
[32663.239427]        <ffffffff802e3503>{unix_poll+35} 
<ffffffff8017e255>{do_select+645}
[32663.239443]        <ffffffff8017dee0>{__pollwait+0} 
<ffffffff8017e6df>{sys_select+735}
[32663.239454]        <ffffffff802e34d3>{unix_ioctl+179} 
<ffffffff8017d591>{do_ioctl+33}
[32663.239468]        <ffffffff8010a9b6>{system_call+126}
[32663.239479] Mem-info:
[32663.239481] DMA per-cpu:
[32663.239483] cpu 0 hot: high 0, batch 1 used:0
[32663.239485] cpu 0 cold: high 0, batch 1 used:0
[32663.239487] DMA32 per-cpu:
[32663.239489] cpu 0 hot: high 186, batch 31 used:51
[32663.239491] cpu 0 cold: high 62, batch 15 used:61
[32663.239493] Normal per-cpu: empty
[32663.239494] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[32663.239498] Free pages:        7944kB (0kB HighMem)
[32663.239502] Active:236574 inactive:411 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1986 slab:7842 mapped:236198 pagetables:2268
[32663.239506] DMA free:4016kB min:44kB low:52kB high:64kB active:8116kB 
inactive:0kB present:12140kB pages_scanned:9383 all_unreclaimable? yes
[32663.239509] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 993 993 993
[32663.239515] DMA32 free:3928kB min:4008kB low:5008kB high:6012kB 
active:938180kB inactive:1644kB present:1017768kB pages_scanned:1110002 
all_unreclaimable? yes
[32663.239518] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.239521] Normal free:0kB min:0kB low:0kB high:0kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[32663.239524] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.239527] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:128kB high:128kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[32663.239530] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.239532] DMA: 0*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB 1*512kB 
1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 4016kB
[32663.239538] DMA32: 0*4kB 5*8kB 7*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB 
1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3928kB
[32663.239545] Normal: empty
[32663.239546] HighMem: empty
[32663.239550] Swap cache: add 85318, delete 76238, find 101568/105563, race 
0+0
[32663.239552] Free swap  = 904488kB
[32663.239553] Total swap = 996020kB
[32663.239555] Free swap:       904488kB
[32663.245748] 262064 pages of RAM
[32663.245751] 5375 reserved pages
[32663.245752] 202019 pages shared
[32663.245754] 9080 pages swap cached
[32663.245833] Out of Memory: Kill process 15896 (kdeinit) score 129680 and 
children.
[32663.245836] Out of memory: Killed process 15901 (klauncher).
[32663.245930] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0x200d2, order=0
[32663.245932]
[32663.245933] Call Trace: <ffffffff8014fece>{out_of_memory+62} 
<ffffffff80151115>{__alloc_pages+549}
[32663.245956]        <ffffffff801618c3>{read_swap_cache_async+67} 
<ffffffff80159e73>{swapin_readahead+99}
[32663.245967]        <ffffffff8015a4e2>{__handle_mm_fault+1570} 
<ffffffff80296193>{sock_def_readable+35}
[32663.245979]        <ffffffff8011ce56>{do_page_fault+966} 
<ffffffff8010b2e5>{error_exit+0}
[32663.246005]        <ffffffff8012b434>{do_syslog+436} 
<ffffffff8012b3e8>{do_syslog+360}
[32663.246013]        <ffffffff8013dda0>{autoremove_wake_function+0} 
<ffffffff8016bd3d>{vfs_write+301}
[32663.246022]        <ffffffff8013dda0>{autoremove_wake_function+0} 
<ffffffff8016be63>{sys_write+83}
[32663.246031]        <ffffffff8012b659>{sys_syslog+9} 
<ffffffff8010a9b6>{system_call+126}
[32663.246043] Mem-info:
[32663.246044] DMA per-cpu:
[32663.246046] cpu 0 hot: high 0, batch 1 used:0
[32663.246048] cpu 0 cold: high 0, batch 1 used:0
[32663.246050] DMA32 per-cpu:
[32663.246052] cpu 0 hot: high 186, batch 31 used:51
[32663.246054] cpu 0 cold: high 62, batch 15 used:61
[32663.246056] Normal per-cpu: empty
[32663.246058] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[32663.246060] Free pages:        7944kB (0kB HighMem)
[32663.246064] Active:236574 inactive:411 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1986 slab:7842 mapped:236198 pagetables:2268
[32663.246068] DMA free:4016kB min:44kB low:52kB high:64kB active:8116kB 
inactive:0kB present:12140kB pages_scanned:9383 all_unreclaimable? yes
[32663.246071] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 993 993 993
[32663.246076] DMA32 free:3928kB min:4008kB low:5008kB high:6012kB 
active:938180kB inactive:1644kB present:1017768kB pages_scanned:1110062 
all_unreclaimable? yes
[32663.246079] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.246082] Normal free:0kB min:0kB low:0kB high:0kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[32663.246085] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.246088] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:128kB high:128kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[32663.246091] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.246093] DMA: 0*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB 1*512kB 
1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 4016kB
[32663.246100] DMA32: 0*4kB 5*8kB 7*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB 
1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3928kB
[32663.246106] Normal: empty
[32663.246108] HighMem: empty
[32663.246111] Swap cache: add 85318, delete 76238, find 101568/105564, race 
0+0
[32663.246113] Free swap  = 904488kB
[32663.246115] Total swap = 996020kB
[32663.246116] Free swap:       904488kB
[32663.251972] 262064 pages of RAM
[32663.251974] 5375 reserved pages
[32663.251976] 202019 pages shared
[32663.251978] 9080 pages swap cached
[32663.252173] oom-killer: gfp_mask=0xd0, order=0
[32663.252175]
[32663.252176] Call Trace: <ffffffff8014fece>{out_of_memory+62} 
<ffffffff802e6da4>{thread_return+0}
[32663.252197]        <ffffffff80151115>{__alloc_pages+549} 
<ffffffff801511e4>{__get_free_pages+52}
[32663.252207]        <ffffffff8017df2a>{__pollwait+74} 
<ffffffff802e3503>{unix_poll+35}
[32663.252217]        <ffffffff8017e255>{do_select+645} 
<ffffffff8017dee0>{__pollwait+0}
[32663.252233]        <ffffffff8017e6df>{sys_select+735} 
<ffffffff802e34d3>{unix_ioctl+179}
[32663.252242]        <ffffffff8017d591>{do_ioctl+33} 
<ffffffff8010a9b6>{system_call+126}
[32663.252260] Mem-info:
[32663.252262] DMA per-cpu:
[32663.252264] cpu 0 hot: high 0, batch 1 used:0
[32663.252266] cpu 0 cold: high 0, batch 1 used:0
[32663.252267] DMA32 per-cpu:
[32663.252270] cpu 0 hot: high 186, batch 31 used:52
[32663.252272] cpu 0 cold: high 62, batch 15 used:61
[32663.252273] Normal per-cpu: empty
[32663.252275] HighMem per-cpu: empty
[32663.252278] Free pages:        7944kB (0kB HighMem)
[32663.252281] Active:236574 inactive:411 dirty:0 writeback:0 unstable:0 
free:1986 slab:7842 mapped:236198 pagetables:2268
[32663.252286] DMA free:4016kB min:44kB low:52kB high:64kB active:8116kB 
inactive:0kB present:12140kB pages_scanned:9383 all_unreclaimable? yes
[32663.252288] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 993 993 993
[32663.252294] DMA32 free:3928kB min:4008kB low:5008kB high:6012kB 
active:938180kB inactive:1644kB present:1017768kB pages_scanned:1110122 
all_unreclaimable? yes
[32663.252297] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.252300] Normal free:0kB min:0kB low:0kB high:0kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[32663.252302] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.252306] HighMem free:0kB min:128kB low:128kB high:128kB active:0kB 
inactive:0kB present:0kB pages_scanned:0 all_unreclaimable? no
[32663.252309] lowmem_reserve[]: 0 0 0 0
[32663.252311] DMA: 0*4kB 0*8kB 1*16kB 1*32kB 0*64kB 1*128kB 1*256kB 1*512kB 
1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 4016kB
[32663.252317] DMA32: 0*4kB 5*8kB 7*16kB 0*32kB 1*64kB 1*128kB 0*256kB 1*512kB 
1*1024kB 1*2048kB 0*4096kB = 3928kB
[32663.252324] Normal: empty
[32663.252325] HighMem: empty
[32663.252328] Swap cache: add 85318, delete 76238, find 101568/105564, race 
0+0
[32663.252330] Free swap  = 904488kB
[32663.252332] Total swap = 996020kB
[32663.252334] Free swap:       904488kB
[32663.258198] 262064 pages of RAM
[32663.258201] 5375 reserved pages
[32663.258203] 202019 pages shared
[32663.258204] 9080 pages swap cached

it is always the same:
makeopts with j2
kdepim or wesnoth in the works.

ALWAYS.

j1 solves it, once and for all. No oom, no problems.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:

> I've yet to see a gcc process that claims 100MB of
> physical memory.

Well, I haven't looked at memory usage, but when Qt or kdelibs
is being compiled, the system gets quite slow and especially
during linking quite some memory is used.



Alexander Skwar
-- 
We are what we pretend to be.
		-- Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

2006/5/5, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name>:
> Hans-Werner Hilse wrote:
>
> > I've yet to see a gcc process that claims 100MB of
> > physical memory.
>
> Well, I haven't looked at memory usage, but when Qt or kdelibs
> is being compiled, the system gets quite slow and especially
> during linking quite some memory is used.
kdelibs is not the most slow one!When i compiled openoffice,and system
is very slow and it took me 12 hours , and creat 5Gb files in my disk
in the process.

I will never try to do such painfull thing again.
>
>
>
> Alexander Skwar
> --
> We are what we pretend to be.
>                 -- Kurt Vonnegut, Jr.
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
>> (snip)
>> 
>> The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not compile 
>> because of ooms.
>> 
>> with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as with -j2.
> 
> This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
> functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?

Not me. I'm using -j2 on a single CPU system just fine.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Will the third world war keep "Bosom Buddies" off the air?
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 16:20, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> >> (snip)
> >>
> >> The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not
> >> compile because of ooms.
> >>
> >> with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as with
> >> -j2.
> >
> > This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
> > functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?
>
> Not me. I'm using -j2 on a single CPU system just fine.
>

and you don't use AMD64, do you?
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Friday 05 May 2006 16:20, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Farhan Ahmed wrote:
>> > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:

>> > This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
>> > functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?
>>
>> Not me. I'm using -j2 on a single CPU system just fine.
> 
> and you don't use AMD64, do you?

No, I don't. Celeron M with 1.50 GHz.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Most people don't need a great deal of love nearly so much as they need
a steady supply.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 19:49, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Friday 05 May 2006 16:20, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> >> > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> >> >
> >> > This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
> >> > functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?
> >>
> >> Not me. I'm using -j2 on a single CPU system just fine.
> >
> > and you don't use AMD64, do you?
>
> No, I don't. Celeron M with 1.50 GHz.
>

yeah, with my athlon-xp, I never saw oom on compiling, but with amd64, one gig 
is sometimes not enough ;)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 15:19, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > The difference is: with -j2 box is slow. A lot of packages do not compile
> > because of ooms.
> >
> > with -j1 box is normal. No ooms. Compiling does not take longer as with
> > -j2.
>
> This is the first time I'm hearing this.. Even with -j2 my system
> functions normally.. Has anyone encountered same problem?
>
> PS: Your quote in previous message about gentoo-wiki is not true..
> Although I agree that the Flags I quoted were unstable, you cannot say
> gentoo-wiki cannot be trusted just because it can be edited by anyone..
> If you are true then you cannot trust any Free Software because it too
> can be edited.. Agreed that someone might post wrong info, but it's even
> more likely that someone will recognize it and correct it.. This is the
> beauty of open source..

it is much easier to vandalize a wiki then software.

I, you, anyone can get one or two sentences into any wiki article, that look 
sane, but are totally wrong. And nobody but an expert would find it.

gentoowiki is nice, but you always have to turn your brain on, before doing, 
what is written there. 
The same is true for wikipedia - don't think, that everything written there is 
true. Blatant vandalization is easy to spot. But subtile misinformation, that 
is the problem. And it is a big one.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1331 bytes --]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> On Friday 05 May 2006 15:19, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> (snip)
> >
> > PS: Your quote in previous message about gentoo-wiki is not true..
> > Although I agree that the Flags I quoted were unstable, you cannot say
> > gentoo-wiki cannot be trusted just because it can be edited by anyone..
> > If you are true then you cannot trust any Free Software because it too
> > can be edited.. Agreed that someone might post wrong info, but it's even
> > more likely that someone will recognize it and correct it.. This is the
> > beauty of open source..
> 
> it is much easier to vandalize a wiki then software.
> 
> I, you, anyone can get one or two sentences into any wiki article, that look 
> sane, but are totally wrong. And nobody but an expert would find it.
> 
> gentoowiki is nice, but you always have to turn your brain on, before doing, 
> what is written there. 
> The same is true for wikipedia - don't think, that everything written there is 
> true. Blatant vandalization is easy to spot. But subtile misinformation, that 
> is the problem. And it is a big one.

But it'll be corrected nonetheless.. :)

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 17:35, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Friday 05 May 2006 15:19, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > > PS: Your quote in previous message about gentoo-wiki is not true..
> > > Although I agree that the Flags I quoted were unstable, you cannot say
> > > gentoo-wiki cannot be trusted just because it can be edited by anyone..
> > > If you are true then you cannot trust any Free Software because it too
> > > can be edited.. Agreed that someone might post wrong info, but it's
> > > even more likely that someone will recognize it and correct it.. This
> > > is the beauty of open source..
> >
> > it is much easier to vandalize a wiki then software.
> >
> > I, you, anyone can get one or two sentences into any wiki article, that
> > look sane, but are totally wrong. And nobody but an expert would find it.
> >
> > gentoowiki is nice, but you always have to turn your brain on, before
> > doing, what is written there.
> > The same is true for wikipedia - don't think, that everything written
> > there is true. Blatant vandalization is easy to spot. But subtile
> > misinformation, that is the problem. And it is a big one.
>
> But it'll be corrected nonetheless.. :)

do you really think?

There are cases, where misonformation was not found for month, even longer - 
and there are a lot of very demanding and obscure articles, would you really 
bet, that every case of voluntary misinformation can and will be found?

I won't.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1781 bytes --]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> There are cases, where misonformation was not found for month, even longer - 
> and there are a lot of very demanding and obscure articles, would you really 
> bet, that every case of voluntary misinformation can and will be found?

In that case you should stop using GNU/OSS software, as you have no way
of knowing every piece of code using your brains.. Have you ever audited
kernel before updating? No.. But still you update.. Why? Because you
trust that someone will point some malicious code, if any, before it
comes to your machine.. Likewise, if someone reads the article and he
sees some inconsistency, he'll in all likelihood correct it (just in
wiki's, not entirely possible in "Reliable Articles By Experts").. 

Just as an example, compare Wikipedia spelling accuracy to other sources,
you'll find that Wikipedia is far better.. When thousands of people are
editing a article there will always be some odd person who will post
misinformation, but how many people will correct it? Almost everyone who
points that misinformation..

Almost every book we read contain some mistakes, so should we stop
reading book or stop learning from it.. But at least with wiki pages one
has the option of correcting the mistakes live.. If you don't trust the
community that's doing this great work of writing free software, sharing
their knowledge in Wiki's, then what's the point of using GNU/Linux? I'm
not saying that you are entirely wrong, but your assumption that one
must not follow wiki's just because they are world editable is wrong

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hemmann, Volker Armin]

On Friday 05 May 2006 19:58, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > There are cases, where misonformation was not found for month, even
> > longer - and there are a lot of very demanding and obscure articles,
> > would you really bet, that every case of voluntary misinformation can and
> > will be found?
>
> In that case you should stop using GNU/OSS software, as you have no way
> of knowing every piece of code using your brains.. Have you ever audited
> kernel before updating? No.. But still you update.. Why? Because you
> trust that someone will point some malicious code, if any, before it
> comes to your machine.. Likewise, if someone reads the article and he
> sees some inconsistency, he'll in all likelihood correct it (just in
> wiki's, not entirely possible in "Reliable Articles By Experts")..

not everybody has write access to the cvs/svn/whatever tree.

In all software projects, only devs have write access. Everybody else can send 
in patches, but they can not just edit the sources. And I trust the devs, 
because if shit happens, everybody will be able to see, who did it.

With wikipedia, everybody can go and edit what they want, when they want, 
where they want.

Why don't you google? Hidden vandalism and misinformation are known problems.

There are even cases, where someone corrected an article, and an admin undid 
the corrections, because people are not allowed to edit their biographies. 
Even if there are blatant lies and errors.

You can use
http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Main_Page

as a starting point.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Maurice E Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2025 bytes --]

OMG
Will this thread ever stop?
It's been high jacked 5 times.
Will the guy that asked the original question please 
either grow a brain or use the one he has. So rest of us don't have to
create filters for this list?

What does gentoo-wiki have to do with firefox in the hands of children?

Thank you

On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 23:15 +0200, Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:

> On Friday 05 May 2006 19:58, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > > (snip)
> > >
> > > There are cases, where misonformation was not found for month, even
> > > longer - and there are a lot of very demanding and obscure articles,
> > > would you really bet, that every case of voluntary misinformation can and
> > > will be found?
> >
> > In that case you should stop using GNU/OSS software, as you have no way
> > of knowing every piece of code using your brains.. Have you ever audited
> > kernel before updating? No.. But still you update.. Why? Because you
> > trust that someone will point some malicious code, if any, before it
> > comes to your machine.. Likewise, if someone reads the article and he
> > sees some inconsistency, he'll in all likelihood correct it (just in
> > wiki's, not entirely possible in "Reliable Articles By Experts")..
> 
> not everybody has write access to the cvs/svn/whatever tree.
> 
> In all software projects, only devs have write access. Everybody else can send 
> in patches, but they can not just edit the sources. And I trust the devs, 
> because if shit happens, everybody will be able to see, who did it.
> 
> With wikipedia, everybody can go and edit what they want, when they want, 
> where they want.
> 
> Why don't you google? Hidden vandalism and misinformation are known problems.
> 
> There are even cases, where someone corrected an article, and an admin undid 
> the corrections, because people are not allowed to edit their biographies. 
> Even if there are blatant lies and errors.
> 
> You can use
> http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Main_Page
> 
> as a starting point.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3250 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Peter Kelly]

On Friday 05 May 2006 17:36, Maurice E Johnson wrote:
> OMG
> Will this thread ever stop?
> It's been high jacked 5 times.
> Will the guy that asked the original question please
> either grow a brain or use the one he has. So rest of us don't have to
> create filters for this list?
>
> What does gentoo-wiki have to do with firefox in the hands of children?
>
> Thank you
>

Will top-posting never stop?
Will selective quoting ever be used so we don't have to create filters?

Mail lists in the hands of children...

Peter
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1944 bytes --]

Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> With wikipedia, everybody can go and edit what they want, when they want, 
> where they want.

Agreed. But that's also a good thing about it. Anybody can *correct*
what they want, when they want, where they want. Why do you think people
will always try to be destructive. No only a few are rest want to be
constructive and at every chance they get they'll correct it. This is a
proven fact as demonstrated by the Free Software Movement. Security..
Ringing Bells?

> Why don't you google? Hidden vandalism and misinformation are known problems.

Are these known problems only with Wikipedia? I think not. And when a
problem has been identified it can always be solved. The Linus's law "Given
enough eyeballs, all errors are shallow" hold good to Wikipedia also.
 
> There are even cases, where someone corrected an article, and an admin undid 
> the corrections, because people are not allowed to edit their biographies. 
> Even if there are blatant lies and errors.

Well if he can't edit it, someone else will always do it. Come on how
many people read and at the same time audit the articles.

 
> You can use
> http://www.wikitruth.info/index.php?title=Main_Page

Referring to wikitruth for facts about wikipedia reminds me of
Microsoft's Get the Facts page. They both contain article which show
their positions as truth while ignoring all other facts which contradict
their claims. Why don't you check out

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wilki/wikipedia

It also has criticism about wikipedia and all other facts about it. If
you think something is wrong or inaccurate with the article, please use
the power given to you and correct it.

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)
Check Out       :  http://gentooisbest.blogspot.com

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Peter Kelly]

On Friday 05 May 2006 12:58, Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > (snip)
> >
> > There are cases, where misonformation was not found for month, even
> > longer - and there are a lot of very demanding and obscure articles,
> > would you really bet, that every case of voluntary misinformation can and
> > will be found?
>
> In that case you should stop using GNU/OSS software, as you have no way
> of knowing every piece of code using your brains.. Have you ever audited
> kernel before updating? No.. But still you update.. Why? Because you
> trust that someone will point some malicious code, if any, before it
> comes to your machine.. Likewise, if someone reads the article and he
> sees some inconsistency, he'll in all likelihood correct it (just in
> wiki's, not entirely possible in "Reliable Articles By Experts")..
>
> Just as an example, compare Wikipedia spelling accuracy to other sources,
> you'll find that Wikipedia is far better.. When thousands of people are
> editing a article there will always be some odd person who will post
> misinformation, but how many people will correct it? Almost everyone who
> points that misinformation..

Got to agree there.  Ever posted something in a NG that wasn't quite correct?  
How quickly those who know better jump in....

Peter
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Richard Fish]

On 5/1/06, Farhan Ahmed <farhanahmed06@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you wish to have latest packages, change ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86", it
> might make your system a bit unstable but going through my experience it
> has not broken a thing in my system.

And I recommend that you do *not* set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 unless you
are prepared for the consequences.

It is very much a testing environment, where either the ebuild or the
package itself might not be completely stable, or worse, incompatible
with previous configuration files or other packages on your system. 
Baselayout and udev have been particularly 'dangerous' on ~x86
recently.

Additionally, ~x86 updates more frequently than x86, so you will have
much more downloading and compiling to do at each update.

Yes ~x86 does work most of the time, and the Gentoo devs are extremely
good at fixing problems quickly.  But it can be expected to break
occasionally, and you need to know what do when it does.

If you want ~x86 for specific packages, use /etc/portage/package.keywords.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1486 bytes --]

On Tuesday 02 May 2006 09:34 am, Richard Fish wrote:
> On 5/1/06, Farhan Ahmed <farhanahmed06@gmail.com> wrote:
> > If you wish to have latest packages, change ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86", it
> > might make your system a bit unstable but going through my experience it
> > has not broken a thing in my system.
>
> And I recommend that you do *not* set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 unless you
> are prepared for the consequences.

WHAT CONSEQUENCES!?

I've asked on multiple occassions for a comparison to a Debian paradigm.  My 
first distro was Debian.  So a comparison to Debian would do me a world of 
good.

> It is very much a testing environment, where either the ebuild or the
> package itself might not be completely stable, or worse, incompatible
> with previous configuration files or other packages on your system.
> Baselayout and udev have been particularly 'dangerous' on ~x86
> recently.
>
> Additionally, ~x86 updates more frequently than x86, so you will have
> much more downloading and compiling to do at each update.

Yeah, I think I'll avoid that until I have a distcc network running!  
Compiling on my poor laptop takes *forever!*

> Yes ~x86 does work most of the time, and the Gentoo devs are extremely
> good at fixing problems quickly.  But it can be expected to break
> occasionally, and you need to know what do when it does.

Mean time to failure?

> If you want ~x86 for specific packages, use /etc/portage/package.keywords.

Okay.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2245 bytes --]

On Wednesday 03 May 2006 23:02, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?':
> I've asked on multiple occassions for a comparison to a Debian paradigm.
>  My first distro was Debian.  So a comparison to Debian would do me a
> world of good.

ARCH ~= STABLE

but more volatile -- there's no real release version, packages are 
maintained separately unless they are packaged together upstream or depend 
on one another so you'll still get regular updates, but the packages have 
been though some amount of testing by the devs and those running:

~ARCH ~= TESTING

though there's less testing, packages don't have to survive being masked 
for any period of time so you will occasionally get an package that would 
only be suited for "Sid".  It's still exceedingly rare for these packages 
to screw your system, but it is possible especially if you don't read the 
e(info|notice|warn)s that are output during the install or become lax in 
your config file updating.  Anything truly experimental will be masked 
while the devs (and brave users) test internally.

If you do run ~arch and can spend some time reporting you successes and 
failures, consider becoming an arch tester, assuming your arch needs more.

package.mask'd, profile masked, or missing keyword ~= SID (or worse)

These packages are either experimental with changes that are likely to 
break the system, or have been known to break someones system, possibly 
including data loss.  Some development teams *cough*KDE*cough* are quite 
flexible with the "experimental" label -- I had kde 3.5 installed with few 
to no problems for (what seemed like) months before they were unmasked.

Of course, ebuilds in the forums and bugzilla (and anywhere else other than 
the standard portage tree) are like foreign repositories.  Gentoo devs 
(and most of the people on the mailing lists) can't and won't provide 
support for those packages or problems that may/might be caused by them.

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Walter Dnes]

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 09:02:45PM -0700, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote

> > And I recommend that you do *not* set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 unless you
> > are prepared for the consequences.
> 
> WHAT CONSEQUENCES!?
> 
> I've asked on multiple occassions for a comparison to a Debian
> paradigm.  My first distro was Debian.  So a comparison to Debian
> would do me a world of good.

  Gentoo ~x86 (or ~whatever) is roughly equivalant to a mix of Debian
"Testing" and "Unstable".  A package may be ~ simply because it hasn't
been tested enough yet to certify as stable.  Or it may be horribly
broken.  Or somewhere in between.  If you were comfortable running
Debian unstable, you'll be comfortable running Gentoo ~x86.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> In linux /sbin/init is Job #1
My musings on technology and security at http://tech_sec.blog.ca
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 936 bytes --]

On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:27 pm, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 09:02:45PM -0700, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com
> wrote
>
> > > And I recommend that you do *not* set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS=~x86 unless you
> > > are prepared for the consequences.
> >
> > WHAT CONSEQUENCES!?
> >
> > I've asked on multiple occassions for a comparison to a Debian
> > paradigm.  My first distro was Debian.  So a comparison to Debian
> > would do me a world of good.
>
>   Gentoo ~x86 (or ~whatever) is roughly equivalant to a mix of Debian
> "Testing" and "Unstable".  A package may be ~ simply because it hasn't
> been tested enough yet to certify as stable.  Or it may be horribly
> broken.  Or somewhere in between.  If you were comfortable running
> Debian unstable, you'll be comfortable running Gentoo ~x86.

THANK YOU!  That made quite a bit of sense to me.  You have no idea how much 
sense that made to me, actually.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Ryan Tandy]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:27 pm, Walter Dnes wrote:
>   
>>   Gentoo ~x86 (or ~whatever) is roughly equivalant to a mix of Debian
>> "Testing" and "Unstable".  A package may be ~ simply because it hasn't
>> been tested enough yet to certify as stable.  Or it may be horribly
>> broken.  Or somewhere in between.  If you were comfortable running
>> Debian unstable, you'll be comfortable running Gentoo ~x86.
>>     
Actually, this isn't quite true.  The difference between arch and ~arch 
is strictly a Gentoo difference - packages aren't shifted from 
package.mask to ~arch until they're considered stable by upstream.  
~arch is the Gentoo testing branch: where the ebuild is refined and 
where the code is patched if it breaks due to crazy C(XX)FLAGS, USE, etc.

Packages where the *code* (as opposed to the *ebuild*) is still 
considered unstable and which may actually break things badly are left 
in package.mask.

HTH.

Ryan
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Walter Dnes]

On Thu, May 04, 2006 at 09:35:44PM -0700, Ryan Tandy wrote
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> >On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:27 pm, Walter Dnes wrote:
> >  
> >>  Gentoo ~x86 (or ~whatever) is roughly equivalant to a mix of Debian
> >>"Testing" and "Unstable".  A package may be ~ simply because it hasn't
> >>been tested enough yet to certify as stable.  Or it may be horribly
> >>broken.  Or somewhere in between.  If you were comfortable running
> >>Debian unstable, you'll be comfortable running Gentoo ~x86.
> >>    
> Actually, this isn't quite true.  The difference between arch and ~arch 
> is strictly a Gentoo difference - packages aren't shifted from 
> package.mask to ~arch until they're considered stable by upstream.  
> ~arch is the Gentoo testing branch: where the ebuild is refined and 
> where the code is patched if it breaks due to crazy C(XX)FLAGS, USE, etc.
> 
> Packages where the *code* (as opposed to the *ebuild*) is still 
> considered unstable and which may actually break things badly are left 
> in package.mask.

  There isn't a 100% exact mapping like..
Gentoo-~arch  => Debian-Testing
Gentoo-masked => Debian-Unstable

  It's a mixture.  Even "an ebuild-related problem" can cause brokeness.
"The consequences" are...
  1) More liklihood of strange bugs/breakage
  2) You will *NOT* get bug-support here or in bugzilla.gentoo.org for
     packages marked as ~arch

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> In linux /sbin/init is Job #1
My musings on technology and security at http://tech_sec.blog.ca
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1516 bytes --]

On Friday 05 May 2006 13:55, "Walter Dnes" <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?':
>   2) You will *NOT* get bug-support here or in bugzilla.gentoo.org for
>      packages marked as ~arch

That is absolutely untrue.  I run ~amd64 and I've never had trouble getting 
support on this list or b.g.o.  In fact, the purpose of providing ~ARCH is 
to elicit bug reports; if a package is ~ARCH for 90 days w/o a bug report, 
it moves to ARCH. ~ARCH is mostly *testing* with just a dash of unstable 
thrown in.

Now, a lot of the time the suggested way to fix your system is to mask the 
~ARCH ebuilds of a package that's causing problems (after you file a bug).  
That's natural.  You've found a bug that will be fixed in the future, but 
for now you'll need to stop using the buggy software.  Makes sense, yes?

[Of course, as part of bug diagnosis, you might be asked to continue 
running the ~ARCH package so you can test.]

What you won't find support for is ebuilds from outside the portage tree or 
masked ebuilds that you've unmasked.  (Masked ebuilds are known to be 
broken OR are being tested by the developers and they aren't interested in 
user bugs yet -- probably because just their small group finds enough 
bugs.)

-- 
"If there's one thing we've established over the years,
it's that the vast majority of our users don't have the slightest
clue what's best for them in terms of package stability."
-- Gentoo Developer Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 07:22 am, Jeff Rollin wrote:
>> Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of Gentoo
>> till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG"
> 
> So, this is going to be a very elementary question, but it's honestly because 
> I don't know.
> 
> I have major problems with Firefox (and even Eclipse) acting very sluggishly.  
> It's understandably annoying, but after using Windows for ten years, I've 
> learned to just swallow a lot of garbage and forget about it.  However, now 
> that there's (possibly) a way to fix all this...
> 
> I don't know about USE flags.  I think I get that they're special compile-time 
> preprocessor macros to enable/disable certain things,

No, they are not. They enable/disable things, but they are not
preprocessor macros. A USE flage might set or remove certain
preprocessor macros, but that's not necessarily the main purpose
of USE flags.

> but I don't know how to 
> use them, as in change them.

Read the manual.

>> localhost ~ # emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
>> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.keywords: 
> app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19
>> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.keywords: dev-libs/libassuan-0.6.10
>> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.keywords: dev-libs/libksba-0.9.12
>> --- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: 
> =dev-libs/libassuan-0.6.10 ~x86
>> --- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: 
> =dev-libs/libksba-0.9.12 ~x86
>> --- Invalid atom in /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: 
> =app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19 ~x86
> 
> This part I'm worried about, but am not trying to fix right now.  Any 
> suggestions, though OT, would be nice.

Suggestion: Fix your package.keywords and package.mask files. Seems
you've got those files mixed up. Post the line with "app-crypt/gpg-agent-1.9.19"
from package.keywords and package.mask.

>> These are the packages that I would merge, in reverse order:
> 
>> Calculating dependencies ...done!
>> [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.0.8 [1.0.7-r4] -debug +gnome 
> +ipv6 +java* -mozcalendar -mozdevelop -moznoxft -mozsvg +truetype -xinerama 
> -xprint 32,135 kB
> 
> I see here that I've got it compiled with the debug pointers

How do you see that? A "-" normally means, that something is substracted.
So, I'd be interested to understand how you see that.

> (which I'm told 
> slow things down) and it has no KDE/Qt support, either.  This... could be a 
> problem.
> 
> First:
> 
> I'd like to know where I can change the USE flags globally,

It's in the manual. The file /etc/make.conf is your friend here.

 > such that all new
> activity will have no debug support, which I don't need.

Why do you think, that it has debug support?

> Second:
> 
> How can I specifically re-build a package with changed USE flags? 

You know, reading the manual WOULD help. Really. You might be
interested in /etc/portage/package.use

Your questions are answered in the "portage" man page.

> Thanks for your time!  Hope I'm not too annoying!  And if there's any part of 
> my Netiquette that isn't correct, tell me.

Your real name is hilarious. "Lord Sauron The Great" ... Come
on, how old are you? 10?

Alexander Skwar
-- 
To converse at the distance of the Indes by means of sympathetic contrivances
may be as natural to future times as to us is a literary correspondence.
		-- Joseph Glanvill, 1661
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Jeff Rollin wrote:

> I know a lot of people don't recommend this, but I haven't had any 
> trouble with CFLAGS="-O3", specifically in firefox 1.5.0.2

If -O3 REALLY gives a speedup depends heavily on your CPU. You
might not get a speedup at all - and, more likely, you might
not get a *noticeable* speedup.

Alexander Skwar

PS: Please no HTML!
-- 
How many surrealists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?

One to hold the giraffe and one to fill the bathtub with brightly colored
power tools.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1110 bytes --]

Alexander,

DG_DISABLE_DEBUG strips debugging information from binaries, making them
smaller (and faster)

Jeff.

On 30/04/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
>
> Jeff Rollin wrote:
>
> > I know a lot of people don't recommend this, but I haven't had any
> > trouble with CFLAGS="-O3", specifically in firefox 1.5.0.2
>
> If -O3 REALLY gives a speedup depends heavily on your CPU. You
> might not get a speedup at all - and, more likely, you might
> not get a *noticeable* speedup.
>
> Alexander Skwar
>
> PS: Please no HTML!
> --
> How many surrealists does it take to screw in a lightbulb?
>
> One to hold the giraffe and one to fill the bathtub with brightly colored
> power tools.
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1764 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Richard Fish]

On 4/30/06, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com> wrote:
> Alexander,
>
>  DG_DISABLE_DEBUG strips debugging information from binaries, making them
> smaller (and faster)

Maybe as a CFLAG, but not a USE flag.  And it will only affect
gnome/glib/gtk applications.

PS: As Alexander already said, please do not top post, and learn to
trim your replies.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

2006/4/30, Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org>:
> On 4/30/06, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Alexander,
> >
> >  DG_DISABLE_DEBUG strips debugging information from binaries, making them
> > smaller (and faster)
>
> Maybe as a CFLAG, but not a USE flag.  And it will only affect
> gnome/glib/gtk applications.
Are you sure it can work?Is there anybody else using it ?I have never
heard of such cflag or use flag
>
> PS: As Alexander already said, please do not top post, and learn to
> trim your replies.
>
> -Richard
>
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

wu chuanwen wrote:
> 2006/4/30, Richard Fish <bigfish@asmallpond.org>:
>> On 4/30/06, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > Alexander,
>> >
>> >  DG_DISABLE_DEBUG strips debugging information from binaries, making them
>> > smaller (and faster)
>>
>> Maybe as a CFLAG, but not a USE flag.  And it will only affect
>> gnome/glib/gtk applications.
> Are you sure it can work?Is there anybody else using it ?I have never
> heard of such cflag or use flag

Me neither. It seems that portage doesn't know about such a
USE flag ("euse -i DG_DISABLE_DEBUG" doesn't show anything)
and CFLAG - well, I don't know. It seems that also very few
people use it - google doesn't return much and in the Gentoo
forums, only one "person" called "DizL" sems to use ist.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
I can't decide which WRONG TURN to make first!!  I wonder if BOB
GUCCIONE has these problems!
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 788 bytes --]

Jeff Rollin wrote:
> 
> DG_DISABLE_DEBUG strips debugging information from binaries, making them
> smaller (and faster)
> 

I dont think there is any use flags like DG_DISABLE_DEBUG.. As for as
debugging symbols goes the use flag 'debug' control them i guess.. And
as far as i know on x86 arch it -debug, so by default it strips
debugging info from binaries..

Here's a snip from portage/profiles/use.desc:

	debug - Tells configure and the makefiles to build for
		debugging. Effects vary across packages, but generally
		it will at least add -g to CFLAGS. Remember to set
		FEATURES=nostrip too
		
Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 267 bytes --]

2006/4/30, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com>:
>
> I know a lot of people don't recommend this, but I haven't had any trouble
> with CFLAGS="-O3", specifically in firefox 1.5.0.2
>
> I can't use O3 because i got many errors when complied my gentoo .I use
O2,
--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 740 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1160 bytes --]

2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name>:
>
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> >
> >
> > 2006/4/30, Jeff Rollin <jeff.rollin@gmail.com
> > <mailto:jeff.rollin@gmail.com>>:
> >
> >     Works fine on mine; what are your USE flags?
> >
> > USE="gtk gnome gcj hal -qt -kde dvd alsa cdr nptl nptlonly pic".
>
> Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
> you run
>
>         emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
>
> I get:
>
> [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2-r1 [1.5.0.2]
> USE="-debug gnome -ipv6 java -mozdevelop -xinerama xprint" 0 kB

I get this:
[ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2 [1.5.0.1-r4] USE="gnome
ipv6 -debug -java -mozdevelop -xinerama -xprint" 37 kB



Have you yet tried a blank profile?

What do you mean?How to do it?


Alexander Skwar
>
> PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.


Do you mean the link i  gave in the mail before?Or another thing?
I'm sorry if i bring you any troubles but i really don't know what happen.

--
> "Is it really you, Fuzz, or is it Memorex, or is it radiation sickness?"
> -- Sonic Disruptors comics
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2298 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

wu chuanwen wrote:
> 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name 
> <mailto:listen@alexander.skwar.name>>:

>     Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
>     you run
> 
>             emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox

> 
> I get this:
> [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2 [1.5.0.1-r4] 
> USE="gnome ipv6 -debug -java -mozdevelop -xinerama -xprint" 37 kB

Do you really need ipv6? I doubt that this has anything to
do with the problem at hand, but if you don't need it, you
should remove it. If you don't know anything about ipv6,
it's very probable that you don't need it.

To the others: Is ipv6 still one of the default flags? Has
this bug still not been fixed?

>     Have you yet tried a blank profile?
> 
> What do you mean?

As I wrote:

Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".

>     PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.
> 
> Do you mean the link i  gave in the mail before?Or another thing?

I mean, that you compose your mails in gmail as HTML or
rich text. This makes them bigger without adding any
benefit to it - indeed, as you can see above, it makes
it even worse, as there are no proper "> " quote marks
before the quoted text.

Simply click on "plain text".

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Trespassers will be shot.  Survivors will be prosecuted.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name>:
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> > 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name
> > <mailto:listen@alexander.skwar.name>>:
>
> >     Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
> >     you run
> >
> >             emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
>
> >
> > I get this:
> > [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2 [1.5.0.1-r4]
> > USE="gnome ipv6 -debug -java -mozdevelop -xinerama -xprint" 37 kB
>
> Do you really need ipv6? I doubt that this has anything to
> do with the problem at hand, but if you don't need it, you
> should remove it. If you don't know anything about ipv6,
> it's very probable that you don't need it.
>
thinks for this advice.Maybe next time when i am free i will re
-emerge my firefox
> To the others: Is ipv6 still one of the default flags? Has
> this bug still not been fixed?
>
> >     Have you yet tried a blank profile?
> >
> > What do you mean?
>
> As I wrote:
>
> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".
>
I have tried,and i am not sure it fater now! Just some time to see it.
> >     PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.
> >
> > Do you mean the link i  gave in the mail before?Or another thing?
>
> I mean, that you compose your mails in gmail as HTML or
> rich text. This makes them bigger without adding any
> benefit to it - indeed, as you can see above, it makes
> it even worse, as there are no proper "> " quote marks
> before the quoted text.
>
> Simply click on "plain text".
>
Oh! I know now.I use gmail(i think it is the best e-mail now which can
sort you e-mail by topic and looks very good!)and never see my mail
from the mail-list in other application.
Is this mail OK now ?
> Alexander Skwar
> --
> Trespassers will be shot.  Survivors will be prosecuted.
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>

Thanks for your reply!

--
wcw

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

wu chuanwen wrote:

> Oh! I know now.I use gmail(i think it is the best e-mail now which can
> sort you e-mail by topic and looks very good!)and never see my mail
> from the mail-list in other application.
> Is this mail OK now ?

Yes, that's *VERY* *MUCH* better now. Thanks a lot!

Alexander Skwar
-- 
In one moment, Earth; in the next, Heaven.

          -- Academician Prokhor Zakharov,
             "For I Have Tasted The Fruit"
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 487 bytes --]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> (snip)_
> 
> To the others: Is ipv6 still one of the default flags? Has
> this bug still not been fixed?
>
> (snip)

Well in default-linux/{alpha,amd64,arm,hppa,ia64,m68k,s390,sh,x86} 
profiles, its on by default.. I don know for sure that in hardened profile 
it's turned off..

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2168 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 April 2006 08:47 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> > 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name
> > <mailto:listen@alexander.skwar.name>>:
> >
> >     Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
> >     you run
> >
> >             emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
> >
> >
> > I get this:
> > [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2 [1.5.0.1-r4]
> > USE="gnome ipv6 -debug -java -mozdevelop -xinerama -xprint" 37 kB
>
> Do you really need ipv6? I doubt that this has anything to
> do with the problem at hand, but if you don't need it, you
> should remove it. If you don't know anything about ipv6,
> it's very probable that you don't need it.

IPV6 is a protocol that is (AFAIK) just a layer below TCP/IP.  I wouldn't 
remove it if I were you.

> To the others: Is ipv6 still one of the default flags? Has
> this bug still not been fixed?
>
> >     Have you yet tried a blank profile?
> >
> > What do you mean?
>
> As I wrote:
>
> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".

I don't see how that would help anything.

> >     PS: Please no HTML. Makes your posts harder to read.
> >
> > Do you mean the link i  gave in the mail before?Or another thing?
>
> I mean, that you compose your mails in gmail as HTML or
> rich text. This makes them bigger without adding any
> benefit to it - indeed, as you can see above, it makes
> it even worse, as there are no proper "> " quote marks
> before the quoted text.

Yes, it's very rude to send in anything other than plain-text.  HTML is for 
web sites, not email.  RTF is for dorks with nothing better to do other than 
format their text.  There really isn't a need for it - if you have something 
to say that can't be expressed in plain-text, it's probably too forceful for 
public expression!

> Simply click on "plain text".

For GMail users that's just above the text area you write your messages in.

> Alexander Skwar
> --
> Trespassers will be shot.  Survivors will be prosecuted.

The one I heard was "Trespassers will be shot.  Survivors will be shot again."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Nich Steicke]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 08:47 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>   
>> wu chuanwen wrote:
>>     
>>> 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name
>>> <mailto:listen@alexander.skwar.name>>:
>>>
>>>     Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
>>>     you run
>>>
>>>             emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
>>>
>>>
>>> I get this:
>>> [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2 [1.5.0.1-r4]
>>> USE="gnome ipv6 -debug -java -mozdevelop -xinerama -xprint" 37 kB
>>>       
>> Do you really need ipv6? I doubt that this has anything to
>> do with the problem at hand, but if you don't need it, you
>> should remove it. If you don't know anything about ipv6,
>> it's very probable that you don't need it.
>>     
>
> IPV6 is a protocol that is (AFAIK) just a layer below TCP/IP.  I wouldn't 
> remove it if I were you.
No, this is simply wrong - IPV6 is the next generation protocol we are 
currently using IPV4 - why IPV6 is a default build flag i would have no 
idea, as from what i can see, it will be a good while before IPV6 
actually becomes implemented.

-- 
Nicholas Steicke
-----------------------------
http://www.narthollis.net
"Information Belongs to the World" (Antitrust, 2001)

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Graham Murray]

Nich Steicke <nano-tech@netspace.net.au> writes:

> No, this is simply wrong - IPV6 is the next generation protocol we are
> currently using IPV4 - why IPV6 is a default build flag i would have
> no idea, as from what i can see, it will be a good while before IPV6
> actually becomes implemented.

IPv6 is already implemented. For example my ISP provides me with a /64
which is routed to my DSL line. I connect to quite a few web sites
using Ipv6, many DNS queries use it, and I have had over 500 incoming
SMTP connections using it since upgrading to kernel 2.6.16 (when
ip6tables lists new connections)
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Graham Murray wrote:
> Nich Steicke <nano-tech@netspace.net.au> writes:
> 
>> No, this is simply wrong - IPV6 is the next generation protocol we are
>> currently using IPV4 - why IPV6 is a default build flag i would have
>> no idea, as from what i can see, it will be a good while before IPV6
>> actually becomes implemented.
> 
> IPv6 is already implemented. 

Certainly. But this still doesn't answer, why it is a default build
flag? As it is right now, only a minority of users is able to use
IPv6. Why aren't other "minority USE Flags" enabled?

It makes no sense to have IPv6 enabled for everyone.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
"Well, if you can't believe what you read in a comic book, what *can*
you believe?!"
-- Bullwinkle J. Moose
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 08:47 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> wu chuanwen wrote:
>> > 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name
>> > <mailto:listen@alexander.skwar.name>>:
>> >
>> >     Hm, those are not firefox USE flags. What do you get, when
>> >     you run
>> >
>> >             emerge -vpt mozilla-firefox
>> >
>> >
>> > I get this:
>> > [ebuild     U ] www-client/mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2 [1.5.0.1-r4]
>> > USE="gnome ipv6 -debug -java -mozdevelop -xinerama -xprint" 37 kB
>>
>> Do you really need ipv6? I doubt that this has anything to
>> do with the problem at hand, but if you don't need it, you
>> should remove it. If you don't know anything about ipv6,
>> it's very probable that you don't need it.
> 
> IPV6 is a protocol

Yep.

> that is (AFAIK) just a layer below TCP/IP.

Wrong. Besides: "just a layer below TCP/IP" makes no sense.
TCP/IP is a protocol family. Two of those members are IPv4
and IPv6. Now, what's "just a layer below TCP/IP" supposed
to mean?

> I wouldn't 
> remove it if I were you.

Why not? Why leave in things, which are not needed and which
are known to possibly cause problems?

>> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".
> 
> I don't see how that would help anything.

It would help, if the problem is on his side, caused by bad
settings in his profile. If everything's faster with a blank
profile, he knows for sure, that the problems were caused
by his old profile.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1671 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 10:50 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 08:47 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> wu chuanwen wrote:
> >> > 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name
> > that is (AFAIK) just a layer below TCP/IP.
>
> Wrong. Besides: "just a layer below TCP/IP" makes no sense.
> TCP/IP is a protocol family. Two of those members are IPv4
> and IPv6. Now, what's "just a layer below TCP/IP" supposed
> to mean?

I didn't know.  I'm not a network programmer.  I will be sometime when I get 
the time to read up on it all, but until then, it was just a educated guess.

> > I wouldn't
> > remove it if I were you.
>
> Why not? Why leave in things, which are not needed and which
> are known to possibly cause problems?

For me the "Why not?" is the part that I can't answer. I don't know what it 
does, therefore I don't mess around with it.

Furthermore, I have never heard of it causing problems.

> >> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox
> >> -ProfileManager".
> >
> > I don't see how that would help anything.
>
> It would help, if the problem is on his side, caused by bad
> settings in his profile. If everything's faster with a blank
> profile, he knows for sure, that the problems were caused
> by his old profile.

I've never *ever* heard of a profile being corrupted.  I'd be very surprised 
if that's the case.

Nonetheless, it is a good idea, if a bit debatable in the likelihood it fixing 
the problem at hand.

> Alexander Skwar
> --
> It is better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.

I'd beg to differ.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 10:50 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 08:47 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> >> wu chuanwen wrote:
>> >> > 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name
>> > that is (AFAIK) just a layer below TCP/IP.
>>
>> Wrong. Besides: "just a layer below TCP/IP" makes no sense.
>> TCP/IP is a protocol family. Two of those members are IPv4
>> and IPv6. Now, what's "just a layer below TCP/IP" supposed
>> to mean?
> 
> I didn't know.

Aha. If you don't know, why are you then making suggestions?

>  I'm not a network programmer.

Me neither. And there's no need to be one.

>> > I wouldn't
>> > remove it if I were you.
>>
>> Why not? Why leave in things, which are not needed and which
>> are known to possibly cause problems?
> 
> For me the "Why not?" is the part that I can't answer. I don't know what it 
> does, therefore I don't mess around with it.

And because of that, you're contradicting?

> Furthermore, I have never heard of it causing problems.

Well, you don't read much, do you?

>> >> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox
>> >> -ProfileManager".
>> >
>> > I don't see how that would help anything.
>>
>> It would help, if the problem is on his side, caused by bad
>> settings in his profile. If everything's faster with a blank
>> profile, he knows for sure, that the problems were caused
>> by his old profile.
> 
> I've never *ever* heard of a profile being corrupted.

Okay, you actually do not read much. I'm rather active in the
german Mozilla newsgroups, and the far majority of problems is
caused by profile issues.

But why are you saying: "I don't see how that would help anything."?

>  I'd be very surprised 
> if that's the case.

I wouldn't be.

> Nonetheless, it is a good idea,

Yep.

> if a bit debatable

No, not at all. It's the first step. If something's broken, reset it
to a known good state. And that's what a blank profile is.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
If your bread is stale, make toast.

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

wu chuanwen wrote:
> Hi! Everybody!
> I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?

Not really.

> In 
> my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck 
> and even can not scroll up and down.

Works fine here.

> Many peple have the same 
> situation.

Haven't heard of.

> Do you think so?

No, I don't.

> And how can you solve this problem?

Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Andrea Barisani]

On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 02:59:06PM +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> >Hi! Everybody!
> >I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?
> 
> Not really.
> 
> >In 
> >my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck 
> >and even can not scroll up and down.
> 
> Works fine here.
> 
> >Many peple have the same 
> >situation.
> 
> Haven't heard of.
> 
> >Do you think so?
> 
> No, I don't.
> 
> >And how can you solve this problem?
> 
> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".
> 
> Alexander Skwar
> -- 
> Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!
> -- 
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>

Try using this:

$ MOZ_DISABLE_PANGO=1 firefox

-- 
Andrea Barisani <lcars@gentoo.org>                            .*.
Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer                          V
                                                             (   )
PGP-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc   (   )
    0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E        ^^_^^
      "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate"
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1437 bytes --]

2006/4/30, Andrea Barisani <lcars@gentoo.org>:
>
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 02:59:06PM +0200, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > wu chuanwen wrote:
> > >Hi! Everybody!
> > >I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?
> >
> > Not really.
> >
> > >In
> > >my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck
> > >and even can not scroll up and down.
> >
> > Works fine here.
> >
> > >Many peple have the same
> > >situation.
> >
> > Haven't heard of.
> >
> > >Do you think so?
> >
> > No, I don't.
> >
> > >And how can you solve this problem?
> >
> > Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox
> -ProfileManager".
> >
> > Alexander Skwar
> > --
> > Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
>
> Try using this:
>
> $ MOZ_DISABLE_PANGO=1 firefox


It seems better now, but i am not sure.
I will be very appreciated if you can tell me what the command means!
Thanks!

--
> Andrea Barisani <lcars@gentoo.org>                            .*.
> Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer                          V
>                                                              (   )
> PGP-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc   (   )
>     0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E        ^^_^^
>       "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate"
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2932 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Andrea Barisani]

On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 01:35:18PM +0000, wu chuanwen wrote:
> >
> >Try using this:
> >
> >$ MOZ_DISABLE_PANGO=1 firefox
> 
> 
> It seems better now, but i am not sure.
> I will be very appreciated if you can tell me what the command means!
> Thanks!
>

It disables pango library usage, there's a known bug about it that makes
firefox scrolling and stuff very slow. Google for it and you'll find lots of
reports about it.

Cheers

-- 
Andrea Barisani <lcars@gentoo.org>                            .*.
Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer                          V
                                                             (   )
PGP-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc   (   )
    0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E        ^^_^^
      "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate"
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

2006/5/1, Andrea Barisani <lcars@gentoo.org>:
> On Sun, Apr 30, 2006 at 01:35:18PM +0000, wu chuanwen wrote:
> > >
> > >Try using this:
> > >
> > >$ MOZ_DISABLE_PANGO=1 firefox
> >
> >
> > It seems better now, but i am not sure.
> > I will be very appreciated if you can tell me what the command means!
> > Thanks!
> >
>
> It disables pango library usage, there's a known bug about it that makes
> firefox scrolling and stuff very slow. Google for it and you'll find lots of
> reports about it.
Is there any way to fix it? I just don' t start firefox everytime like that.
>
> Cheers
>
> --
> Andrea Barisani <lcars@gentoo.org>                            .*.
> Gentoo Linux Infrastructure Developer                          V
>                                                              (   )
> PGP-Key 0x864C9B9E http://dev.gentoo.org/~lcars/pubkey.asc   (   )
>     0A76 074A 02CD E989 CE7F AC3F DA47 578E 864C 9B9E        ^^_^^
>       "Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate"
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 843 bytes --]

2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name>:
>
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> > Hi! Everybody!
> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?
>
> Not really.
>
> > In
> > my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck
> > and even can not scroll up and down.
>
> Works fine here.
>
> > Many peple have the same
> > situation.
>
> Haven't heard of.


Really?Open this page ,you can see how many people complant firefox from
april 15th!

> Do you think so?
>
> No, I don't.
>
> > And how can you solve this problem?
>
> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".


Can  you  tell me  which  version  you  are  using ?

Alexander Skwar
> --
> Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1591 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1075 bytes --]

2006/4/30, wu chuanwen <wcw8410@gmail.com>:
>
>
>
> 2006/4/30, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name>:
>
> > wu chuanwen wrote:
> > > Hi! Everybody!
> > > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?
> >
> > Not really.
> >
> > > In
> > > my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be
> > stuck
> > > and even can not scroll up and down.
> >
> > Works fine here.
> >
> > > Many peple have the same
> > > situation.
> >
> > Haven't heard of.
>
>
> Really?Open this page ,you can see how many people complant firefox from
> april 15th!
>

I am sorry,i forget the link:
http://www.linuxsir.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=252747

> Do you think so?
> >
> > No, I don't.
> >
> > > And how can you solve this problem?
> >
> > Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox
> > -ProfileManager".
>
>
> Can  you  tell me  which  version  you  are  using ?
>
> Alexander Skwar
> > --
> > Would you people stop playing these stupid games?!?!?!!!!
> > --
> > gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> wcw
>



--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2708 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Raymond Lewis Rebbeck]

On Sunday, April 30 2006 22:52, wu chuanwen wrote:

> I am sorry,i forget the link:
> http://www.linuxsir.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=252747

I don't think it'd be much help posting a Chinese forum thread in an English 
mailing list.

-- 
Raymond Lewis Rebbeck
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 508 bytes --]

2006/4/30, Raymond Lewis Rebbeck <dystopianray@gmail.com>:
>
> On Sunday, April 30 2006 22:52, wu chuanwen wrote:
>
> > I am sorry,i forget the link:
> > http://www.linuxsir.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=252747
>
> I don't think it'd be much help posting a Chinese forum thread in an
> English
> mailing list.


I just mean to show that  many people don't think firefox is so good and i
search some methods to solve the problem.

--
> Raymond Lewis Rebbeck
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1070 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Benno Schulenberg]

wu chuanwen wrote:
> 2006/4/30, Raymond Lewis Rebbeck <dystopianray@gmail.com>:
> > On Sunday, April 30 2006 22:52, wu chuanwen wrote:
> > > http://www.linuxsir.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=252747
> >
> > I don't think it'd be much help posting a Chinese forum thread
> > in an English mailing list.
>
> I just mean to show that  many people don't think firefox is so
> good

But most of the people here can't read what's written there: for all 
we know they could be singing the praises of spaghetti.  :)

Maybe, though, your Firefox gets slow because of the Chinese (?) 
characters?  Have you tried visiting only English sites for a while?

And if it's caused by bad or heavy use of Javascript, also try 
avoiding the sites you usually visit, hop around on gentoo.org and 
similar sites, open lots of tabs and see what happens there.

Benno
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

2006/4/30, Benno Schulenberg <benno.schulenberg@gmail.com>:
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> > 2006/4/30, Raymond Lewis Rebbeck <dystopianray@gmail.com>:
> > > On Sunday, April 30 2006 22:52, wu chuanwen wrote:
> > > > http://www.linuxsir.org/bbs/showthread.php?t=252747
> > >
> > > I don't think it'd be much help posting a Chinese forum thread
> > > in an English mailing list.
> >
> > I just mean to show that  many people don't think firefox is so
> > good
>
> But most of the people here can't read what's written there: for all
> we know they could be singing the praises of spaghetti.  :)
It's my fault.I didn't consider it much.
>
> Maybe, though, your Firefox gets slow because of the Chinese (?)
> characters?  Have you tried visiting only English sites for a while?
I don't think that is becaust my Chinese characters.It seems better
now for the advices from
Alexander Skwar and Andrea Barisani(nice man).
In fact,i usually visit the English sites(you know,in China,linux is
not so flourish yet although more and more people join this group.
>
> And if it's caused by bad or heavy use of Javascript, also try
> avoiding the sites you usually visit, hop around on gentoo.org and
> similar sites, open lots of tabs and see what happens there.
>
> Benno
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

wu chuanwen wrote:

> Can  you  tell me  which  version  you  are  using ?

mozilla-firefox-1.5.0.2

PS: Please only send HTML mails, if it is really necessary.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
There is only one word for aid that is genuinely without strings,
and that word is blackmail.
		-- Colm Brogan
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Philip Webb]

060430 wu chuanwen wrote:
> I think most of us are using firefox now. Do you think it's too slow?
> if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,
> my firefox will be stuck and even can not scroll up and down.

I have this problem with Independent (newspaper), but not generally.
I suspect it's caused by heavy or badly-written Javascript.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 904 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 April 2006 05:59 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> wu chuanwen wrote:
> > Hi! Everybody!
> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?

Yes.

> Not really.

You most likely either have a faster machine or have already tweaked yours.

> > In
> > my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck
> > and even can not scroll up and down.

I can't scroll that well even with one window, and only one tab!

> Works fine here.
>
> > Many peple have the same
> > situation.

I do.

> Haven't heard of.
>
> > Do you think so?

Yes.

> No, I don't.
>
> > And how can you solve this problem?
>
> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".

This is something like the third time you've suggested this.  Please explain 
how this will help.  I'm serious: I don't see how this could help.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 05:59 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> wu chuanwen wrote:

>> Not really.
> 
> You most likely either have a faster machine

Celeron M Notebook with 1.5 GHz. Not what I'd call fast :) And
768M ram.

> or have already tweaked yours.

No.

>> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox -ProfileManager".
> 
> This is something like the third time you've suggested this.

You counted? :)

>  Please explain 
> how this will help.  I'm serious: I don't see how this could help.

My assumption: Problem is caused by bad settings, which includes
extensions or themes. If problem goes away with a new/blank profile,
we know where the problem is.

Further, it's a way of working/debugging - you reset everything
to a known working set of things, which is the blank profile.
After that, you re-add things, until it breaks again. As soon
as it breaks, you've got your culprit.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Oh, wow!  Look at the moon!
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1382 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 10:57 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 05:59 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> wu chuanwen wrote:
> >>
> >> Not really.
> >
> > You most likely either have a faster machine
>
> Celeron M Notebook with 1.5 GHz. Not what I'd call fast :) And
> 768M ram.

IBM X40 Type 2386-1CU

1.0GHz Intel Pentium-M Ultra-Low Voltage
256 MB PC 2700 SO-DIMM 200 Pin RAM (CA2.5)
Intel Extreme Graphics 2 64MB shared Graphics Memory
20 GB 4700 RPM Hitachi-made IBM Microdrive
Stunning 12.1 inch 1024x768 LCD screen great for movies ; )
One lonely little system speaker that tries to be a full media speaker but 
fails miserably.

> >> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox
> >> -ProfileManager".
> >
> > This is something like the third time you've suggested this.
>
> You counted? :)

Not really.

> >  Please explain
> > how this will help.  I'm serious: I don't see how this could help.
>
> My assumption: Problem is caused by bad settings, which includes
> extensions or themes. If problem goes away with a new/blank profile,
> we know where the problem is.

Yes, I'm just saying that it's highly unlikely that the profile is the 
problem.  I've never heard of a profile causing a problem in my life.  I 
could be wrong, but I'm still skeptical nonetheless.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 10:57 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 05:59 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> >> wu chuanwen wrote:

>> >> Try a blank Firefox profile. To create one, run "firefox
>> >> -ProfileManager".
>> >
>> > This is something like the third time you've suggested this.
>>
>> You counted? :)
> 
> Not really.

Aha. Why are you then giving an exact number?

>> >  Please explain
>> > how this will help.  I'm serious: I don't see how this could help.
>>
>> My assumption: Problem is caused by bad settings, which includes
>> extensions or themes. If problem goes away with a new/blank profile,
>> we know where the problem is.
> 
> Yes, I'm just saying that it's highly unlikely that the profile is the 
> problem. 

Okay. What's the ground for your reasoning? As I wrote a few
moments ago, my basis is, that I'm quite active in the German
Mozilla newsgroups and thus see how often a blank profile solves
problems.

What about you?

> I've never heard of a profile causing a problem in my life.

Well, that's obviously because you don't read much.

>  I 
> could be wrong,

I wouldn't wonder.

> but I'm still skeptical nonetheless.

Why?

You're a very strange person. But that's to be expected by
people with such a "cool" nickname.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
If rabbits' feet are so lucky, what happened to the rabbit?
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Heiko Wundram]

Am Sonntag 30 April 2006 14:24 schrieb wu chuanwen:
> I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In my
> machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
> even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do you
> think so? And how can you solve this problem?

Most certainly, this is a memory issue. For every tab you have open, Firefox 
keeps a 30-something pages history cache in memory, including pictures, for 
quicker "back-browsing". If you are under tight memory (<512MB, I'd say), you 
quickly notice that the memory requirements of Firefox make the computer 
start to swap, and that the system slows down considerably.

You can turn off this history-caching somewhere, someplace on about:config, 
but I wouldn't know where. Search the net. You're not the first one to 
complain about this.

--- Heiko.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[wu chuanwen]

2006/4/30, Heiko Wundram <me+gentoo-user@modelnine.org>:
> Am Sonntag 30 April 2006 14:24 schrieb wu chuanwen:
> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In my
> > machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
> > even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do you
> > think so? And how can you solve this problem?
>
> Most certainly, this is a memory issue. For every tab you have open, Firefox
> keeps a 30-something pages history cache in memory, including pictures, for
> quicker "back-browsing". If you are under tight memory (<512MB, I'd say), you
My memory is 512mb,but still consider what you said is the point.
> quickly notice that the memory requirements of Firefox make the computer
> start to swap, and that the system slows down considerably.
>
> You can turn off this history-caching somewhere, someplace on about:config,
> but I wouldn't know where. Search the net. You're not the first one to
> complain about this.
I have larger the cache to 80MB.
It's not enough now?
>
> --- Heiko.
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
wcw

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Kesara Rathnayake]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1143 bytes --]

On 4/30/06, Heiko Wundram <me+gentoo-user@modelnine.org> wrote:
>
> Am Sonntag 30 April 2006 14:24 schrieb wu chuanwen:
> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In
> my
> > machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
> > even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Doyou
> > think so? And how can you solve this problem?
>
> Most certainly, this is a memory issue. For every tab you have open,
> Firefox
> keeps a 30-something pages history cache in memory, including pictures,
> for
> quicker "back-browsing". If you are under tight memory (<512MB, I'd say),
> you
> quickly notice that the memory requirements of Firefox make the computer
> start to swap, and that the system slows down considerably.
>
> You can turn off this history-caching somewhere, someplace on
> about:config,
> but I wouldn't know where. Search the net. You're not the first one to
> complain about this.


I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we used
today.




--
-=:><:=--=:><:=-
         K35/\R/\
-=:><:=--=:><:=-

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1543 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

Kesara Rathnayake wrote:

> I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we 
> used today.

To find out, I asked OP to create a blank profile. I also assume
a local problem at his side. OP should simply create a new profile
and report back.

Alexander Skwar

PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this
list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)?
-- 
Well, you can implement a Perl peek() with unpack('P',...).  Once you
have that, there's only security through obscurity.  :-)
              -- Larry Wall in <199710161537.IAA07828@wall.org>
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 935 bytes --]

Alexander Skwar wrote:
> (snip)
> 
> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
> Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this
> list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)?
>

Well I think imposing things is a bad way, I'm sure why we all hate M$
is because it imposes things on us and gives us no choice.. How bout
making the users know bout things and let them decide.. I think you just
converted one mailer from HTML to text.. I guess that's what required..
Proper guidance and knowledge not some rules which deny users the right
to post, just because they do not know whether their mail client is
sending mail in HTML format..

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 444 bytes --]

I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
improves the speed of KDE applications too
--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 472 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[David Morgan]

On 21:11 Sun 30 Apr     , Jeff Rollin wrote:
> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
> improves the speed of KDE applications too

"Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of Gentoo
till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG""

-- 
Join The no2id Coalition, http://www.no2id.net/

djm
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 844 bytes --]

whoops! my bad

On 30/04/06, David Morgan <david.morgan@wadham.oxford.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> On 21:11 Sun 30 Apr     , Jeff Rollin wrote:
> > I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And
> it
> > improves the speed of KDE applications too
>
> "Oh, yeah. I couldn't understand why people raved about the speed of
> Gentoo
> till I added USE="-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG""
>
> --
> Join The no2id Coalition, http://www.no2id.net/
>
> djm
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1293 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Farhan Ahmed]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 496 bytes --]

Jeff Rollin wrote:
> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
> improves the speed of KDE applications too

Read your earlier post.. Anyway where is this CFLAGS 'DG_DISABLE_DEBUG'
documented? I cant find any reference to it in man gcc. No usable
results came up when i googled it..

Farhan Ahmed
-- 
Place		:  Bangalore, Karnataka, India
GPG Key		:  8BE90E98
WengoPhone ID	:  farhanahmed
IRC Nick	:  farhanahmed / farhanahmed06 (irc.freenode.net)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[David Morgan]

On 02:04 Mon 01 May     , Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Jeff Rollin wrote:
> > I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
> > improves the speed of KDE applications too
> 
> Read your earlier post.. Anyway where is this CFLAGS 'DG_DISABLE_DEBUG'
> documented? I cant find any reference to it in man gcc. No usable
> results came up when i googled it..
> 

$cat example.c
#include <stdio.h>

#ifdef FISH
	#define A 1
#endif

int main()
{
    if (A == 1)
	printf("fish!\n");
}

$ gcc -DFISH example.c -o example
$ ./example
fish!

$ gcc example.c -o example
example.c: In function ‘main’:
example.c:9: error: ‘A’ undeclared (first use in this function)
example.c:9: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
example.c:9: error: for each function it appears in.)

(a fairly contrived example, I know)

-- 
Join The no2id Coalition, http://www.no2id.net/

djm
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[The Slash]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1431 bytes --]

On Sunday April 30 2006 16:50, David Morgan wrote:
> On 02:04 Mon 01 May     , Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > Jeff Rollin wrote:
> > > I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG.
> > > And it improves the speed of KDE applications too
> >
> > Read your earlier post.. Anyway where is this CFLAGS 'DG_DISABLE_DEBUG'
> > documented? I cant find any reference to it in man gcc. No usable
> > results came up when i googled it..
>
> $cat example.c
> #include <stdio.h>
>
> #ifdef FISH
> 	#define A 1
> #endif
>
> int main()
> {
>     if (A == 1)
> 	printf("fish!\n");
> }
>
> $ gcc -DFISH example.c -o example
> $ ./example
> fish!
>
> $ gcc example.c -o example
> example.c: In function ‘main’:
> example.c:9: error: ‘A’ undeclared (first use in this function)
> example.c:9: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once
> example.c:9: error: for each function it appears in.)
>
> (a fairly contrived example, I know)
>
> --
> Join The no2id Coalition, http://www.no2id.net/
>
> djm

Interesting... I'm still a little bit paranoid about adding this to make.conf, 
though. Can anybody think of a reason why I wouldn't want to add it?

-- 
This is The Slash, signing off **click**

Registered Linux user #386739

Finger me (the_slash) for my public key (and my geek code, as well).
If you can't find my ip address, I'm usually on irc@freenode.net.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Richard Fish]

On 5/3/06, The Slash <theslash1337@gmail.com> wrote:
> Interesting... I'm still a little bit paranoid about adding this to make.conf,
> though. Can anybody think of a reason why I wouldn't want to add it?

Um, yes, as I have said twice in this thread
already....G_DISABLE_DEBUG DOESN"T DO ANYTHING!!!!

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Ryan Tandy]

Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> Jeff Rollin wrote:
>   
>> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
>> improves the speed of KDE applications too
>>     
>
> Read your earlier post.. Anyway where is this CFLAGS 'DG_DISABLE_DEBUG'
> documented? I cant find any reference to it in man gcc. No usable
> results came up when i googled it..
>
> Farhan Ahmed
>   
It's not a CFLAG, at least not a compiler flag as you would be familiar 
with them.  It's -DG_DISABLE_DEBUG, with the hyphen at the beginning, 
and all it does is tell the compiler to activate a setting called 
G_DISABLE_DEBUG in code that uses it.  From my own Googling, it looks 
like it's meant to be used by applications linking against Glib in their 
build scripts, not by end users.

In any case, if you're going to use -DG_DISABLE_DEBUG, you should also 
add its converse, -UG_ENABLE_DEBUG, since that seems to be the 'proper' 
way to do it.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jeff Rollin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1530 bytes --]

Hmm,

Unfortunately it's so long ago that I don't remember where I saw it. Anyway,
works for me.

Jeff.

On 01/05/06, Ryan Tandy <tarpman@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Farhan Ahmed wrote:
> > Jeff Rollin wrote:
> >
> >> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG.
> And it
> >> improves the speed of KDE applications too
> >>
> >
> > Read your earlier post.. Anyway where is this CFLAGS 'DG_DISABLE_DEBUG'
> > documented? I cant find any reference to it in man gcc. No usable
> > results came up when i googled it..
> >
> > Farhan Ahmed
> >
> It's not a CFLAG, at least not a compiler flag as you would be familiar
> with them.  It's -DG_DISABLE_DEBUG, with the hyphen at the beginning,
> and all it does is tell the compiler to activate a setting called
> G_DISABLE_DEBUG in code that uses it.  From my own Googling, it looks
> like it's meant to be used by applications linking against Glib in their
> build scripts, not by end users.
>
> In any case, if you're going to use -DG_DISABLE_DEBUG, you should also
> add its converse, -UG_ENABLE_DEBUG, since that seems to be the 'proper'
> way to do it.
> --
> gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
------------------------------------------------------
Argument against Linux number 6,033:

"...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1959 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Richard Fish]

On 4/30/06, Farhan Ahmed <farhanahmed06@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jeff Rollin wrote:
> > I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
> > improves the speed of KDE applications too
>
> Read your earlier post.. Anyway where is this CFLAGS 'DG_DISABLE_DEBUG'
> documented? I cant find any reference to it in man gcc. No usable
> results came up when i googled it..

I did some more digging on this.  Actually it looks like
-DG_DISABLE_DEBUG won't have any effect on glib/gtk/gnome
applications.  There is no such thing in /usr/include, or in the
current sources for glib or gtk.

There *is* G_ENABLE_DEBUG, which is only turned on if you merge glib
or gtk with USE=debug, which configures glib/gtk with "./configure ...
--enable-debug=yes ...".  The default glib/gtk debug configuration is
minimum.

Glibc and gtk also support configuring with --enable-debug=no, which
adds -DG_DISABLE_ASSERT, -DG_DISABLE_CHECKS, and/or
-DG_DISABLE_CAST_CHECKS to CFLAGS when they are built.  However, there
is no USE flag currently available to set --enable-debug=no.  (If you
desire this, file a bug report on bugzilla for the feature
enhancement).

It is possible you could get the effect of --enable-debug=no by adding
-UG_DISABLE_ASSERT, -UG_DISABLE_CHECKS, and -UG_DISABLE_CAST to
CFLAGS, but it depends upon whether the package build takes
user-defined CFLAGS into account before or after ./configure defined
flags.  If ./configure is added after the user flags, they will have
no effect.  I have not investigated this at all...

Jeff, whoever told you that -DG_DISABLE_DEBUG did something was lying.
 Current gtk and glibc sources know nothing about this flag.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 751 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 April 2006 01:11 pm, Jeff Rollin wrote:
> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
> improves the speed of KDE applications too

So, can you please tell me how to do this?  I'd really appreciate it.

> ------------------------------------------------------
> Argument against Linux number 6,033:
>
> "...So this is like most Linux viruses. You have to download the virus
> yourself, become root, install it and then run it. Seems like a lot of work
> just to experience what you can get on Windows with a lot less trouble."

I shared something like this with a Apple junkie I know...  it was a article 
about Viruses on WineX.  He just said it proves how self-abusive Linux people 
are.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 01:11 pm, Jeff Rollin wrote:
>> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
>> improves the speed of KDE applications too
> 
> So, can you please tell me how to do this?

Please read the manual. It explains how to set something like this.
make.conf is the appropriate file.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
No line available at 300 baud.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Richard Fish]

On 5/1/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 01:11 pm, Jeff Rollin wrote:
> >> I didn't say DG_DISABLE_DEBUG was a USE flag, I said it was a CFLAG. And it
> >> improves the speed of KDE applications too
> >
> > So, can you please tell me how to do this?
>
> Please read the manual. It explains how to set something like this.
> make.conf is the appropriate file.

But don't bother, 'cause it doesn't do anything anyway.

-Richard

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Justin Patrin]

On 4/30/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
> Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.

It may "default" to HTML now, as do Yahoo and Hotmail, but it's an
easy thing to turn off. I'm still using gmail in text-only mode.

(I hate HTML mail....and I hate Outlook even more.)

--
Justin Patrin

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 793 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 07:55 am, Justin Patrin wrote:
> On 4/30/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
> > Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
> > PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
> > even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
>
> It may "default" to HTML now, as do Yahoo and Hotmail, but it's an
> easy thing to turn off. I'm still using gmail in text-only mode.

It doesn't "default" to HTML.  It defaults to RTF, and even then you can 
change that.

> (I hate HTML mail....and I hate Outlook even more.)

Outlook and Outlook Express are the two worst mail clients in the universe.  
They're too slow and bloated to do anything, and they don't accept ANYTHING 
other than MS Exchange server without throwing a Royal Temper Tantrum.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 07:55 am, Justin Patrin wrote:
>> On 4/30/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
>> > Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
>> > PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
>> > even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
>>
>> It may "default" to HTML now, as do Yahoo and Hotmail, but it's an
>> easy thing to turn off. I'm still using gmail in text-only mode.
> 
> It doesn't "default" to HTML.

Yes, it does. Why do you think, that close to all the gmail users
are sending out HTML mails?

>  It defaults to RTF,

No, it doesn't. It doesn't even send out RTF. It's either
HTML or plain text, what you can compose on gmail.

> and even then you can 
> change that.

Sure, no doubt about that. I fail to understand though, why
GMail sends out HTML, if there's no formatting in the mail,
which would require HTML. IMO, it should behave like Mozilla:
If you compose a mail in the HTML coposer and the mail has
no HTML elements, a text/plain will be created. THAT is the
proper way to go.

>> (I hate HTML mail....and I hate Outlook even more.)
> 
> Outlook and Outlook Express are the two worst mail clients in the universe.  

They are not. Lotus Notes beats them to that.

> They're too slow

Not really.

> and bloated to do anything, and they don't accept ANYTHING 
> other than MS Exchange server

Wrt. Outlook Express, that's plain wrong. And wrt. Outlook: It's
wrong as well. Outlook CAN interface IMAP servers. But you'll
lose all the benefits of Outlook in this case.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
BOFH Excuse #95:

Pentium FDIV bug
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1278 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 11:03 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday 01 May 2006 07:55 am, Justin Patrin wrote:
> >> On 4/30/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
> >> > Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
> >> (I hate HTML mail....and I hate Outlook even more.)
> >
> > Outlook and Outlook Express are the two worst mail clients in the
> > universe.
>
> They are not. Lotus Notes beats them to that.

Ouch.  You sure you want to be handing out a judgement of that magnitude like 
that?  It'd take quite a bit to be worse than Outlook.

> > They're too slow
>
> Not really.

You must not have used them.  I have.  They are.  End of story.

> > and bloated to do anything, and they don't accept ANYTHING
> > other than MS Exchange server
>
> Wrt. Outlook Express, that's plain wrong. And wrt. Outlook: It's
> wrong as well. Outlook CAN interface IMAP servers. But you'll
> lose all the benefits of Outlook in this case.

I said that they can't interface with non-MS Exchange servers withour throwing 
a Royal Temper Tantrum.  They do not like POP.  They like IMAP even less.

Plus, of all the HTML-sending mail clients, Outlook is the worst!  It makes 
the biggest, most bloated HTML I've ever seen!

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 11:03 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Monday 01 May 2006 07:55 am, Justin Patrin wrote:
>> >> On 4/30/06, Alexander Skwar <listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:
>> >> > Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
>> >> (I hate HTML mail....and I hate Outlook even more.)
>> >
>> > Outlook and Outlook Express are the two worst mail clients in the
>> > universe.
>>
>> They are not. Lotus Notes beats them to that.
> 
> Ouch.  You sure you want to be handing out a judgement of that magnitude like 
> that?

Yes, I am sure. Well, my statement is at least true reg. Notes 5.
I do not know Notes 6 or newer. They might have changed Notes and
made it better.

>  It'd take quite a bit to be worse than Outlook.

That's not so hard, as Outlook isn't so bad. No, it's certainly not one
of the better clients, but it's just not the worst MUA on earth.

>> > They're too slow
>>
>> Not really.
> 
> You must not have used them.

I do. Everyday.

>  I have.

I doubt that.

>  They are.  End of story.

Yep. End of story. Outlook isn't the worst MUA on earth.

>> > and bloated to do anything, and they don't accept ANYTHING
>> > other than MS Exchange server
>>
>> Wrt. Outlook Express, that's plain wrong. And wrt. Outlook: It's
>> wrong as well. Outlook CAN interface IMAP servers. But you'll
>> lose all the benefits of Outlook in this case.
> 
> I said that they can't interface with non-MS Exchange servers withour throwing 
> a Royal Temper Tantrum.

Yes, that's what you wrote. Whatever you mean with that.

>  They do not like POP.

As far as Outlook Express is concerned: You're wrong.

>  They like IMAP even less.

Interesting. Please tell that my Outlook, which is using an
(additional) IMAP server just fine.

> Plus, of all the HTML-sending mail clients, Outlook is the worst!  It makes 
> the biggest, most bloated HTML I've ever seen!

Okay, that's quite possibly true, yes. But, actually, HTML code
quality isn't something I care much about at all....

Alexander Skwar
-- 
Nurse Donna:	Oh, Groucho, I'm afraid I'm gonna wind up an old maid.
Groucho:	Well, bring her in and we'll wind her up together.
Nurse Donna:	Do you believe in computer dating?
Groucho:	Only if the computers really love each other.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Hans-Werner Hilse]

Hi,

On Fri, 05 May 2006 08:22:29 +0200 Alexander Skwar
<listen@alexander.skwar.name> wrote:

> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Monday 01 May 2006 11:03 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> >> > Outlook and Outlook Express are the two worst mail clients in the
> >> > universe.
> >>
> >> They are not. Lotus Notes beats them to that.
> > 
> > Ouch.  You sure you want to be handing out a judgement of that
> > magnitude like that?
> 
> Yes, I am sure. Well, my statement is at least true reg. Notes 5.
> I do not know Notes 6 or newer. They might have changed Notes and
> made it better.

Ahem, not really better. Well, a bit. But judging Notes for its eMail
qualities is like judging MS Word for its abilities as a programmer's
editor. Notes _has_ its worth, too, and has some very interesting
features, namely the configurable database replication to the client.
Especially the offline capabilities are pretty good.

-hwh
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Bo Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1430 bytes --]

On Thursday 04 May 2006 05:19, lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 11:03 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> > lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > > Outlook and Outlook Express are the two worst mail clients in the
> > > universe.
> >
[SNIP]
> > > They're too slow
> >
> > Not really.
>
> You must not have used them.  I have.  They are.  End of story.

Please stop saying that everyone else is wrong and you are right when you 
obviously don't know what you are talking about!

> > > and bloated to do anything, and they don't accept ANYTHING
> > > other than MS Exchange server
> >
> > Wrt. Outlook Express, that's plain wrong. And wrt. Outlook: It's
> > wrong as well. Outlook CAN interface IMAP servers. But you'll
> > lose all the benefits of Outlook in this case.
>
> I said that they can't interface with non-MS Exchange servers withour
> throwing a Royal Temper Tantrum.  They do not like POP.  They like IMAP
> even less.

You are wrong! With a statement like this it's really hard to believe that you 
ever actually tried those programs! Outlook has handled POP3 and IMAP since 
version 8 at least (that's just the first version I ever tried so I don't 
know anything about earlier versions). Besides that this has no relevance on 
this list whatsoever. So why discuss it?? Stop making statements of things of 
which you have no knowledge about.

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1501 bytes --]

On Sunday 30 April 2006 11:21 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
> > I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we
> > used today.
>
> To find out, I asked OP to create a blank profile. I also assume
> a local problem at his side. OP should simply create a new profile
> and report back.
>
> Alexander Skwar
>
> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.

I used the GMail web interface for a long time and it defaulted to plain text 
for me.  If I changed to rich-text the next time it'd default to RTF.  I 
changed it to plain-text and then it defaulted the next time to (you guessed 
it) plain text.  I don't know what you're complaining about.  Perhaps you 
tried it at a time when they hadn't yet corrected that bug?  It's still in 
the beta stage, you know.

> Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this
> list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)?

Why not, if it irks you so much, make a script that will change RTF/HTML to 
Plaintext?  It wouldn't be terribly difficult...

Then you could just tack it on to the list daemon or whatever and viola! you'd 
be good to go!

I'm sure some Perl/Python freak would make something to do that in about a 
week and be done with it.  I'm more of a Java/C++ person, so it'd take me 
longer, unless you forced me to use PHP, which I could see myself using...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Sunday 30 April 2006 11:21 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
>> > I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we
>> > used today.
>>
>> To find out, I asked OP to create a blank profile. I also assume
>> a local problem at his side. OP should simply create a new profile
>> and report back.
>>
>> Alexander Skwar
>>
>> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
>> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
> 
> I used the GMail web interface for a long time and it defaulted to plain text 
> for me.

This might be correct. However on new accounts, HTML is used.
If you don't believe me, simply create a new account, and you'll
see.

>  If I changed to rich-text the next time it'd default to RTF.

No, it most certainly did not. Who accepts RTF?

>  I 
> changed it to plain-text and then it defaulted the next time to (you guessed 
> it) plain text.

Yep. This means, it accepts your user settings, but it doesn't say
anything about the defaults.

>  I don't know what you're complaining about.

I complain about HTML mails and about the fact, that Gmail defaults
to HTML mails, despite what you're writing.

>  Perhaps you 
> tried it at a time when they hadn't yet corrected that bug?

What bug? The bug, that the default is, that HTML mails
are composed?

Actually, I don't think it is a bug - I rather think, it's
a business decision.

>  It's still in 
> the beta stage, you know.

As if anything on Google is NOT in beta...

>> Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this
>> list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)?
> 
> Why not,

Makes mails larger, without adding anything useful (normally).
Further, it makes mails a bit harder to read and harder to
quote.

eg. the mail which I quoted: In HTML, it's about 1179 bytes. In
text/plain, it is 729 bytes. And actually, the HTML caused
overhead is even more, as the 2nd MIME part (the HTML part)
caused additional headers to be added. Those are an additional
378 bytes.

So, in this case, we've got a mail of (at least) 2286 bytes,
where 729 bytes would have been sufficient.

> if it irks you so much, make a script that will change RTF/HTML to 
> Plaintext?

That's not a useful advice. I'd have to accept the (normally)
uselessly bloated mail first and then strip it. Makes no sense.

>  It wouldn't be terribly difficult...

Depends.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
We seldom repent talking too little, but very often talking too much.
		-- Jean de la Bruyere
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 3853 bytes --]

On Monday 01 May 2006 11:14 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 11:21 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
> >> Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
> >> > I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we
> >> > used today.
> >>
> >> To find out, I asked OP to create a blank profile. I also assume
> >> a local problem at his side. OP should simply create a new profile
> >> and report back.
> >>
> >> Alexander Skwar
> >>
> >> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
> >> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
> >
> > I used the GMail web interface for a long time and it defaulted to plain
> > text for me.
>
> This might be correct. However on new accounts, HTML is used.
> If you don't believe me, simply create a new account, and you'll
> see.

I'm not contending with you there.

I actually signed up for GMail before they had HTML options, so I wouldn't 
really know for sure.  I'll just take your word for it then.

> >  If I changed to rich-text the next time it'd default to RTF.
>
> No, it most certainly did not. Who accepts RTF?

Not anyone I know of.  I thought that it was in RTF though...

> >  It's still in
> > the beta stage, you know.
>
> As if anything on Google is NOT in beta...

Too true.

> >> Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this
> >> list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)?
> >
> > Why not,
>
> Makes mails larger, without adding anything useful (normally).
> Further, it makes mails a bit harder to read and harder to
> quote.

At this point I'm inclined to think you're using an inferior mail client.

KMail works just fine with HTML.  What are you using?

> eg. the mail which I quoted: In HTML, it's about 1179 bytes. In
> text/plain, it is 729 bytes. And actually, the HTML caused
> overhead is even more, as the 2nd MIME part (the HTML part)
> caused additional headers to be added. Those are an additional
> 378 bytes.

Yah, I agree with you that it's unnecessarily wasting space to use HTML.  
That's why I don't use it.  However, I don't think it's right or polite to 
start harrassing people for using it.

> > if it irks you so much, make a script that will change RTF/HTML to
> > Plaintext?
>
> That's not a useful advice. I'd have to accept the (normally)
> uselessly bloated mail first and then strip it. Makes no sense.

No, you're not thinking!

The mailing list server receives a email in HTML.

Convert the HTML to plaintext.

Then send, and store in the list archives (as plaintext).

Sure, you wasted some bandwidth on receiving the HTML, but you're not making 
the problem worse by sending or storing the bloated form of it, either.

> >  It wouldn't be terribly difficult...
>
> Depends.

On the skil of the programmer, of course.  I'd take a while to do it because 
I'm a perfectionist, and because I'm still new to programming in general.  
I'd automatically turn it into a learning experience, which would make it 
take twice as long.

However, for a established programmer who's learned the ways of the Source, it 
wouldn't be terribly difficult.  Think:

Just take all the tags out.  Convert stuff like:

</p>
<br>

to a newline and you're done!  It's just Presto! and the most basic of 
functionality is there.  Then you can tack on stuff for special characters 
(&lso; and stuff like that... it's been a while, so that's probably not a 
valid code, but you get the idea, right?)

Just delete the junk like the <html> tags and stuff of that nature with 
plaintext doesn't need (or care about).

It's really simple.

> Alexander Skwar
> --
> We seldom repent talking too little, but very often talking too much.
> 		-- Jean de la Bruyere

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Monday 01 May 2006 11:14 pm, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
>> > On Sunday 30 April 2006 11:21 am, Alexander Skwar wrote:
>> >> Kesara Rathnayake wrote:
>> >> > I guess Firefox is slow now because of whole lot of Extentions that we
>> >> > used today.
>> >>
>> >> To find out, I asked OP to create a blank profile. I also assume
>> >> a local problem at his side. OP should simply create a new profile
>> >> and report back.
>> >>
>> >> Alexander Skwar
>> >>
>> >> PS: I begin to hate Googlemail because of the default to use HTML
>> >> even if it is not required. Sucks. Big time.
>> >
>> > I used the GMail web interface for a long time and it defaulted to plain
>> > text for me.
>>
>> This might be correct. However on new accounts, HTML is used.
>> If you don't believe me, simply create a new account, and you'll
>> see.
> 
> I'm not contending with you there.

Well, but you are contradiciting what I say. So, yes, in a sense,
you ARE contending with me.

>> >> Another thing that sucks, is that HTML mails are permitted on this
>> >> list. Why not just dump the HTML part (and every other attachment)?
>> >
>> > Why not,
>>
>> Makes mails larger, without adding anything useful (normally).
>> Further, it makes mails a bit harder to read and harder to
>> quote.
> 
> At this point I'm inclined to think you're using an inferior mail client.

Aha, why's that?

> KMail works just fine with HTML.  What are you using?

Thunderbird - as you can see in the header of my mails.

>> eg. the mail which I quoted: In HTML, it's about 1179 bytes. In
>> text/plain, it is 729 bytes. And actually, the HTML caused
>> overhead is even more, as the 2nd MIME part (the HTML part)
>> caused additional headers to be added. Those are an additional
>> 378 bytes.
> 
> Yah, I agree with you that it's unnecessarily wasting space to use HTML.  
> That's why I don't use it.  However, I don't think it's right or polite to 
> start harrassing people for using it.

Yes, it is. It is, as HTML posters are making other people receive
the HTML junk, even if those receivers do not want that. It's just
plain arrogant and, yes, it is most certainly okay to harras
arrogant egoists.

>> > if it irks you so much, make a script that will change RTF/HTML to
>> > Plaintext?
>>
>> That's not a useful advice. I'd have to accept the (normally)
>> uselessly bloated mail first and then strip it. Makes no sense.
> 
> No, you're not thinking!

Yes, I am.

> The mailing list server receives a email in HTML.

That's not what you wrote. You suggested, that I make a script.
This script can only run on a system which I control.

> Convert the HTML to plaintext.

And overwrite a text/plain part?

Besides: See why it's arrogant of those HTML users to send mails
in HTML? They are making other people have to think about writing
programs, so that the mails can be converted.

That's not necessary if people would just use text/plain mails.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
No poet or novelist wishes he was the only one who ever lived, but most of
them wish they were the only one alive, and quite a number fondly believe
their wish has been granted.
		-- W.H. Auden, "The Dyer's Hand"
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Tero Grundström]

On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, wu chuanwen wrote:

> Hi! Everybody!
> I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In my
> machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck and
> even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do you
> think so? And how can you solve this problem?

Well, I recently switched to the binary version and to my surprise I 
found that it is much faster than the self compiled version. Especially 
the interface is much more responsive in the binary version. I don't know 
how it could be. Makes me really wonder where else I'm loosing speed on 
Gentoo...

My USE flags for the compiled version were minimal and cflags should be 
optimal.

I'd love to know how the binary version is built and if there are others 
who are experiencing the same phenomena.


--
T.G.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[lordsauronthegreat]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 897 bytes --]

On Tuesday 02 May 2006 06:05 am, Tero Grundström wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, wu chuanwen wrote:
> > Hi! Everybody!
> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In
> > my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck
> > and even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do
> > you think so? And how can you solve this problem?
>
> Well, I recently switched to the binary version and to my surprise I
> found that it is much faster than the self compiled version. Especially
> the interface is much more responsive in the binary version. I don't know
> how it could be. Makes me really wonder where else I'm loosing speed on
> Gentoo...

How did you "switch to a binary version?"  How did you do that?  I didn't know 
you could use emerge and not compile it.  Unless, of course, you aren't using 
emerge...

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 191 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Jamie]

<snip>
>
> How did you "switch to a binary version?"  How did you do that?  I didn't
> know
> you could use emerge and not compile it.  Unless, of course, you aren't
> using
> emerge...
>


emerge mozilla-firefox-bin will emerge the binary version of firefox

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Willie Wong]

On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 10:21:25PM -0700, Penguin Lover lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com squawked:
> > Well, I recently switched to the binary version and to my surprise I
> > found that it is much faster than the self compiled version. Especially
> > the interface is much more responsive in the binary version. I don't know
> > how it could be. Makes me really wonder where else I'm loosing speed on
> > Gentoo...
> 
> How did you "switch to a binary version?"  How did you do that?  I didn't know 
> you could use emerge and not compile it.  Unless, of course, you aren't using 
> emerge...

[12:29 AM]wwong ~ $ emerge search mozilla-firefox-bin
Searching...   
[ Results for search key : mozilla-firefox-bin ]
[ Applications found : 1 ]
 
*  www-client/mozilla-firefox-bin
      Latest version available: 1.0.8
      Latest version installed: [ Not Installed ]
      Size of downloaded files: 24,192 kB
      Homepage:    http://www.mozilla.org/projects/firefox
      Description: Firefox Web Browser
      License:     MPL-1.1 NPL-1.1


In fact, for lots of large packages there are binary/precompiled versions 
available in portage, usually with the -bin suffix. 

W

-- 
I remember walking to school through the snow,
uphill both ways, in my bare feet. Oh, now wait...
never mind, that was my father.
Sortir en Pantoufles: up 173 days, 20:56
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] why firefox is so slow?

[Alexander Skwar]

lordsauronthegreat@gmail.com wrote:
> On Tuesday 02 May 2006 06:05 am, Tero Grundström wrote:
>> On Sun, 30 Apr 2006, wu chuanwen wrote:
>> > Hi! Everybody!
>> > I think most of us are using firefox now .Do you think it's too slow?In
>> > my machine,if i open 6 or more tabs in firefox,my firefox will be stuck
>> > and even can not scroll up and down.Many peple have the same situation.Do
>> > you think so? And how can you solve this problem?
>>
>> Well, I recently switched to the binary version and to my surprise I
>> found that it is much faster than the self compiled version. Especially
>> the interface is much more responsive in the binary version. I don't know
>> how it could be. Makes me really wonder where else I'm loosing speed on
>> Gentoo...
> 
> How did you "switch to a binary version?"

Person, why are you asking all those questions? Why don't you
simply *think*, hm?

As you HAVE TO know, there's a -bin version of mozilla-firefox.
You DO KNOW, because

http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=mozilla-firefox

shows you.

>  How did you do that?

With emerge.

> I didn't know 
> you could use emerge and not compile it.

Too bad for you.

Alexander Skwar
-- 
BOFH Excuse #141:

disks spinning backwards - toggle the hemisphere jumper.
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list