March 2002 - WLUG - wlug.mailman3.com

Re: [Wlug] RE: [WPILA-Discuss] Gentoo Linux Distro

by Charles R. Anderson

Exactly. It isn't worth optimizing every single bit of code for you architecture. The important bits, like the kernel and glibc, are already optimized. If you want particular packages optimized, it is pretty simple to do: rpm --rebuild --target=i686 /mnt/cdrom/SRPMS/foo.src.rpm I usually only bother with audio/video en/decoders, emulators (kegs!), etc. On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 11:09:58AM -0500, Scott Venier wrote: scott> or, you could realize that your machine spends 12/13* of it's time in an scott> idle loop (or seti(a)home/distributed.net which are hand tweaked scott> anyway) waiting on user input and just not bother. And that's not even scott> counting the time that processes spend blocked on system io. -- Charles R. Anderson <cra(a)wpi.edu> / http://angus.ind.wpi.edu/~cra/ PGP Key ID: 49BB5886 Fingerprint: EBA3 A106 7C93 FA07 8E15 3AC2 C367 A0F9 49BB 5886

March 19, 2002

RE: [Wlug] RE: [WPILA-Discuss] Gentoo Linux Distro

by Scott Venier

or, you could realize that your machine spends 12/13* of it's time in an idle loop (or seti(a)home/distributed.net which are hand tweaked anyway) waiting on user input and just not bother. And that's not even counting the time that processes spend blocked on system io. Scott * Yes, I just added up minutes of CPU time in my process list, doubled it for the processes that have gone away, and divided by minutes of uptime. On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Keller, Tim wrote: > I think it would be cool if redhat during the install had an option for > "optimized for your architecture". In choosing this option, It would run > either run a test suite and find the best settings for your machine, or it > would have a bunch of custom configs to choose from like > "586/586MMX/Athlon/686/etc". It would then spend about a day hand compiling > every package for your box and then installing it. > > Yeah it would be hilariously slow, but you'd end up with a really optimized > box. The only danger I could see would be if you find that certain > optimizations corrupted things (like gcc/glibc) etc. > > On a side note, you could have an optimize script that ran post install that > you'd just say something like "optimize --all --no=kernel --mode=586MMX > ftp://jungle.unc.edu/blah/blah/redhat" or /mnt/cdrom and it would go off, > grab the SRPMS and systematically make your machine fully 586MMX optimized, > skipping the kernel. Though I'm thinking you'd probably want some order to > the way it did it. I would think that you'd want to upgrade gcc and glibc > first, since they'll speed things up. > > Just ideas... > > Tim. > > -----Original Message----- > From: Frank Sweetser [mailto:fs@WPI.EDU] > Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 18:54 PM > To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > Subject: Re: [Wlug] RE: [WPILA-Discuss] Gentoo Linux Distro > > > On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:35:26PM -0500, Josh Huber wrote: > > Frank Sweetser <fs(a)WPI.EDU> writes: > > > > > Someone please tell me if I'm wrong, because that seems like a > > > pretty hackish way to do things. > > > > Yeah, you're wrong. Please read what I posted, especially: > > > > "By default, after installing this package, the compilers will behave > > normally. However, if the environment variable DEBIAN_BUILDARCH=pentium > > is set, they will enter pentium optimized compile mode." > > Okay, that's not nearly so bad. I still prefer the rpm way, but that's > a reasonable solution as well =) > >

March 19, 2002

RE: [Wlug] RE: [WPILA-Discuss] Gentoo Linux Distro

by Keller, Tim

I think it would be cool if redhat during the install had an option for "optimized for your architecture". In choosing this option, It would run either run a test suite and find the best settings for your machine, or it would have a bunch of custom configs to choose from like "586/586MMX/Athlon/686/etc". It would then spend about a day hand compiling every package for your box and then installing it. Yeah it would be hilariously slow, but you'd end up with a really optimized box. The only danger I could see would be if you find that certain optimizations corrupted things (like gcc/glibc) etc. On a side note, you could have an optimize script that ran post install that you'd just say something like "optimize --all --no=kernel --mode=586MMX ftp://jungle.unc.edu/blah/blah/redhat" or /mnt/cdrom and it would go off, grab the SRPMS and systematically make your machine fully 586MMX optimized, skipping the kernel. Though I'm thinking you'd probably want some order to the way it did it. I would think that you'd want to upgrade gcc and glibc first, since they'll speed things up. Just ideas... Tim. -----Original Message----- From: Frank Sweetser [mailto:fs@WPI.EDU] Sent: Monday, March 18, 2002 18:54 PM To: wlug(a)mail.wlug.org Subject: Re: [Wlug] RE: [WPILA-Discuss] Gentoo Linux Distro On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 05:35:26PM -0500, Josh Huber wrote: > Frank Sweetser <fs(a)WPI.EDU> writes: > > > Someone please tell me if I'm wrong, because that seems like a > > pretty hackish way to do things. > > Yeah, you're wrong. Please read what I posted, especially: > > "By default, after installing this package, the compilers will behave > normally. However, if the environment variable DEBIAN_BUILDARCH=pentium > is set, they will enter pentium optimized compile mode." Okay, that's not nearly so bad. I still prefer the rpm way, but that's a reasonable solution as well =) -- Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 18 Full-time WPI Network Tech, Part time Linux/Perl guy | When I have a kid, I want to buy one of those strollers for twins. Then put the kid in and run around, looking frantic. -- Stephen Wright _______________________________________________ Wlug mailing list Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by Chuck Homic

On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 11:07:44PM -0500, John Murphy wrote: > I hate to appear dumb but what does this mean to us using Linux, how > would this effect us? I am not familiar with MSN Passport so I not sure > what the effect will be. I'm totally ignorant of the issue, but I'll answer anyway. I think the issue is that Charter passed on Wes's personal information (Name, address, and credit card or other payment info) onto Microsoft, so MS can increase their "enrollment" numbers. (The raw "number of clients" stuff looks really good for stock price, etc...) Although it's probably allowed in Charter's contract terms that no one reads, it's a really mean thing to do. I'm not familiar with the exact manner that passport manages security, (I'm sure it's stellar, given Microsoft's record) but a possibly more important issue is that now his payment info is at most as secure as the NET service itself. If someone manages to intercept an "I forgot my password" email, then they can spend his money at will. Yeah, there are a lot of reasons to not like this. Of course someone who actually uses the damn thing could probably tell us if it would be that easy to obtain his password. Anyone here a passport user? (And willing to admit it?) -Chuck

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by John Murphy

On Monday 18 March 2002 20:14, you wrote: > Ummm, > To say that I was pissed off would be putting it mildly. In the fall, > Charter announced that they were beginning a "partnership" with MSN. > Fine; but I realized that this meant that Charter would be trying to > get all their subscribers on to .net. I don't want passport, I don't > want .net. I wrote to Charter, calmly voicing my concerns and recieved > an e-mail that NO CHARTER SUBSCRIBER WOULD BE SIGNED UP FOR A MSN > PASSPORT WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. Well, imagine my surprise this weekend > when I recived a "congratulations" message for "deciding" to sign-up > for passport! > > ?!@#!!!@ > > And who did it to me? Charter Communications....I wrote to Charter to > get me out of passport ASAP. If they refuse, how's everyone feel about > dsl? > > Wes I hate to appear dumb but what does this mean to us using Linux, how would this effect us? I am not familiar with MSN Passport so I not sure what the effect will be. John "Two roads diverged in a wood, and I -- I took the one less traveled by, And that has made all the difference." -- Robert Frost

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by Wesley Allen

I want speakeasy. But it's $14 bucks out of my range, I'm already stretching it with charter......I do some side work at a webmaster for reimbursments and stuff....I wonder.......hmmmm....... Wes Mike Long wrote: >I have Charter as well but do not recall getting a message welcoming me to >.NET. As a matter of fact I did not realize that they became an MSN parther. >That may be because I automatically delete any email that has HTML in the >body. How do I go about finding out if I have been subscribed... > >If only dsl was available at my address :( > >Mike > > >On Monday 18 March 2002 20:14, you wrote: > >>Ummm, >> To say that I was pissed off would be putting it mildly. In the fall, >>Charter announced that they were beginning a "partnership" with MSN. >>Fine; but I realized that this meant that Charter would be trying to get >>all their subscribers on to .net. I don't want passport, I don't want >>.net. I wrote to Charter, calmly voicing my concerns and recieved an >>e-mail that NO CHARTER SUBSCRIBER WOULD BE SIGNED UP FOR A MSN PASSPORT >>WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. Well, imagine my surprise this weekend when I >>recived a "congratulations" message for "deciding" to sign-up for >>passport! >> >>?!@#!!!@ >> >> And who did it to me? Charter Communications....I wrote to Charter to >>get me out of passport ASAP. If they refuse, how's everyone feel about >>dsl? >> >>Wes >> >>_______________________________________________ >>Wlug mailing list >>Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >>http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >> >_______________________________________________ >Wlug mailing list >Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org >http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug >

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by Theo Van Dinter

On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 09:59:08PM -0500, Scott Venier wrote: > I'll chime in for Speakeasy too. I've got 384/128 and it's great. I > consistantly get ~40KB down and close to 30KB up, 4 static IP addresses, > and amazing reliability. That's pretty amazing -- 128kbit = 16KByte, so getting 30KB up is very good! :) -- Theo, now using a cable modem in the new apartment, waiting for next month when he can finally order SpeakEasy for the place ...

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by Scott Venier

I'll chime in for Speakeasy too. I've got 384/128 and it's great. I consistantly get ~40KB down and close to 30KB up, 4 static IP addresses, and amazing reliability. Scott

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by Mike Long

I have Charter as well but do not recall getting a message welcoming me to .NET. As a matter of fact I did not realize that they became an MSN parther. That may be because I automatically delete any email that has HTML in the body. How do I go about finding out if I have been subscribed... If only dsl was available at my address :( Mike On Monday 18 March 2002 20:14, you wrote: > Ummm, > To say that I was pissed off would be putting it mildly. In the fall, > Charter announced that they were beginning a "partnership" with MSN. > Fine; but I realized that this meant that Charter would be trying to get > all their subscribers on to .net. I don't want passport, I don't want > .net. I wrote to Charter, calmly voicing my concerns and recieved an > e-mail that NO CHARTER SUBSCRIBER WOULD BE SIGNED UP FOR A MSN PASSPORT > WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. Well, imagine my surprise this weekend when I > recived a "congratulations" message for "deciding" to sign-up for > passport! > > ?!@#!!!@ > > And who did it to me? Charter Communications....I wrote to Charter to > get me out of passport ASAP. If they refuse, how's everyone feel about > dsl? > > Wes > > _______________________________________________ > Wlug mailing list > Wlug(a)mail.wlug.org > http://mail.wlug.org/mailman/listinfo/wlug

March 19, 2002

Re: [Wlug] Charter and MSN....

by Phillip G Deneault

On Mon, 18 Mar 2002, Frank Sweetser wrote: > On Mon, Mar 18, 2002 at 08:33:16PM -0500, Brian J. Conway wrote: > > > And who did it to me? Charter Communications....I wrote to > > > Charter to get me out of passport ASAP. If they refuse, how's > > > everyone feel about dsl? > > > > SpeakEasy.net is the _only_ way to go with DSL, and I'm sure if you search > > the WLUG mail archives you'll come up with a dozen mentions of it (a > > company with a clue, real services like static IPs, encouraging servers, > > extremely reliable service, and so on). I'll leave it at that. =) > > Ditto. Decent pricing, full bandwidth, rock solid reliability, great online > interface. The only complaint I have about speakeasy is that I couldn't > afford them sooner =) > > -- > Frank Sweetser fs at wpi.edu, fs at suave.net | $ x 18 I'll agree. My 384K SDSL is unbeatable. Plenty of packages to choose from too.... Getting the picture yet? :-) Phil -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Phil Deneault "We work in the dark, We do what we can, deneault(a)wpi.edu We give what we have. Our doubt is our passion, WPI NetOps and our passion is our task. The rest is the OpenVMS Guy maddness of art." - Henry James -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-

March 19, 2002