Bill Nottingham wrote:
John Summerfield (debian@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said:
To be more like the 'normal' installed system. Heck, if DRI's going to fail,
the system's just going to blow up on the first boot anyway. Furthermore,
there are cards/chips that do 2D accel via the 3D pipeline.
If it's not essential for getting the install/upgrade done, _this_ user
doesn't want it.
Please read the last sentence again, then. Unless you want to force
everything through vesa (which can make it slower...)
I commonly use vesa drivers. I don't do high-performance graphics work
at all, and I never thought of Anaconda as being demanding of graphics.
When it was being slow, I didn't think it was doing much graphics at
all, and the progress bars seem to zip along at a satisfying rate when
small packages are being installed.
I think Tracy's right, the bottleneck is disk and network I/o, and I'd
suggest more of the former, taking into account swap activity when
there's too little RAM.
Swap and/or rpm databases, see my very recent post "F9beta updates takes
forever" on fedora-test.
Something over two hours applying about 500 Mbytes of updated rpms on a
system sporting Intel(R) Core(TM)2 CPU and a new SATA drive.
--
Cheers
John
-- spambait
1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Z1aaaaaaa@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375
You cannot reply off-list:-)
_______________________________________________
Anaconda-devel-list mailing list
Anaconda-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/anaconda-devel-list
