Re: 2.1.99 is less rusty

Rik van Riel (
Sun, 3 May 1998 18:06:08 +0200 (MET DST)

On Sun, 3 May 1998, John Campbell wrote:

> after a few days when the newer kernel came out). 2.1.99 is better - it
> actually finished building the kernel, and it only took it about 7.5
> hours. As I write this, it's doing the "make modules", and has been
> doing so for the last 36 hours.


> So, in short, this problem is real, not an artifact of Bill's
> benchmarking method, and I agree with Bill that, IMHO, this is a serious
> problem that shouldn't be allowed into 2.2. One of Linux's strengths has
> been that it could run usefully on very low end hardware, and this
> behavior removes that capability. Unfortunately, I don't know enough
> kernel hacking to fix this myself, so I can't do much more than provide
> another data point here.

Pre-100 _with_ my patch should give you quite a lot of

| Linux: - LinuxHQ MM-patches page | Scouting webmaster |
| - kswapd ask-him & complain-to guy | Vries cubscout leader |
| | <> |

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to