What are you waiting for?

Jacek Poplawski · 2006-11-12 13:11:32

I wonder do you guys feel the same. I must wait very long times for some operations on my system.

1) opening Firefox for a first time
2) starting xfce4
3) opening menu in xfce4 after some change (then it opens immediately)
4) running pacman
5) checking disk usage in ${HOME} (du|sort -nr|less)
6) indexing incomplete movie (mplayer -idx) to preview it

What are your experiences?

pelle.k · 2006-11-12 15:33:45

Hi Jacek!
1. Firefox takes a few seconds to load the first time. That is completely normal however. after that it is normally cached in memory (at least some of the libraries it uses)
2. Starting xfce is fast for me at least. Can you elaborate on "long time" here?
3. Opening menus in xfce is also snappy for me the fist time.
4. Pacman does search it's index everytime i install an app. I belive that is completely normal as well.
5. never done that myself.
6. Indexing an incomplete movie is cpu intensive, just because of that! The movie has no index so mplayer "creates" one "on the fly"...

Jacek Poplawski · 2006-11-12 16:21:43

Pelle, I am not asking how to speedup my system, I am asking what are the things you need to wait for in your system

twiistedkaos · 2006-11-12 16:53:11

This topic should be in Linux Discussion I believe then, since you aren't asking for help.

arox1 · 2006-11-12 17:05:38

Starting Firefox (it's also slow in use)

It's really slow, even Opera in GTK environment (xfce) starts faster

dtw · 2006-11-12 19:33:05

-beyond

harlekin · 2006-11-12 19:54:36

Self-coded inefficient openbox php pipe menus. (;

rezza · 2006-11-13 07:50:34

xmas

T-Dawg · 2006-11-13 11:39:46

Jacek Poplawski wrote:

1) opening Firefox for a first time

Try swiftfox. It's firefox optimized for linux and your processer. See the AUR.

What are your experiences?

Firefox sucks.

mucknert · 2006-11-13 12:31:20

To get rid of the slowish pacman you can install the pactools from the AUR and cage pacman with pt-pacman-cage. It will greatly increase the speed of pacman. The actual problem is, that the pacman-index consists of several files and is therefore fragmented all over the HD. Caging it puts it in only one file (a loopback-device) which will not be as fragmented as the many files before. Therefore, the index-reads will be a lot faster than before. Try it, it is perfectly safe to use and can be undone.

pelle.k · 2006-11-14 17:20:35

What am I waiting for?
1. Gnome to start. first gnome panel show up, then the panel icons show up, one by one, then nautilus background picture, and at last the desktop icons show up sequentially (which is kind of annoying). If you want to give me a desktop, load it all into memory, then show it all at once, rather than giving me it piece by piece. I fart on this behaviour.
2. KDE to load. It does however load it all at once, besides autostarted applications such as kmix yakuake etc etc. I liked it better before someone rearranged the startup scripts in 3.5.3 and made kde _seem_ start faster. It doesn't. You are only given a desktop before it's completely loaded. I also fart on this behaviour!

superstoned · 2006-11-15 00:11:54

pelle.k wrote:

What am I waiting for?
1. Gnome to start. first gnome panel show up, then the panel icons show up, one by one, then nautilus background picture, and at last the desktop icons show up sequentially (which is kind of annoying). If you want to give me a desktop, load it all into memory, then show it all at once, rather than giving me it piece by piece. I fart on this behaviour.
2. KDE to load. It does however load it all at once, besides autostarted applications such as kmix yakuake etc etc. I liked it better before someone rearranged the startup scripts in 3.5.3 and made kde _seem_ start faster. It doesn't. You are only given a desktop before it's completely loaded. I also fart on this behaviour!

i totally agree. the reason they added this stupid behaviour to KDE was because everybody said KDE was slow to start compared to Gnome and XP. but those two only SEEM to start faster, tough, on linux you can already start working when the desktop shows, which you can't on windows.

lets hope KDE 4 is so much faster we won't notice this annoying thing anymore ;-)

Arch Linux

#1 2006-11-12 13:11:32

What are you waiting for?

#2 2006-11-12 15:33:45

Re: What are you waiting for?

#3 2006-11-12 16:21:43

Re: What are you waiting for?

#4 2006-11-12 16:53:11

Re: What are you waiting for?

#5 2006-11-12 17:05:38

Re: What are you waiting for?

#6 2006-11-12 19:33:05

Re: What are you waiting for?

#7 2006-11-12 19:54:36

Re: What are you waiting for?

#8 2006-11-13 07:50:34

Re: What are you waiting for?

#9 2006-11-13 11:39:46

Re: What are you waiting for?

#10 2006-11-13 12:31:20

Re: What are you waiting for?

#11 2006-11-14 17:20:35

Re: What are you waiting for?

#12 2006-11-15 00:11:54

Re: What are you waiting for?

Board footer