On 2016-02-11 17:00, Anton Aylward wrote:
On 02/11/2016 09:17 AM, Ruben Safir wrote:
Carlos, this is running on an intel ATOM which is a low power chip (on a fit/pc2)
It still shouldn't. IMO, be so slow to get a terminal
I can't disagree with that.
I have a bunch of the old ex-Closet-of-Anxiety PCs with old, old chips running under 1GHz and less than 1G of RAM that handle 586/Suse fine. I can ssh into and out of them quite adequately. I don't plan to try to run LEAP/64 on them :-)
Yes. But I have a pentium IV machine with 500 MB (not 500 MiB), and the text terminals take several seconds to appear after the first attempt to use them. I have to try [Enter], then [ctrl][alt][f7], and back to [ctrl][alt][f1]. Apparently it has to assign resources, and memory. Of course it swaps, but not much: 167MB. On top it has a problematic Intel video chipset, with bugs that make the screen to don't recover from dark, and no expectancy of having them solved now. It is true that previous releases were faster, but it is similar to desktop apps loading faster because they are preloaded during boot, or only when actually called. You get a faster boot, but you pay a delay later. A design decision, and as all such, it has consequences (if you don't use consoles, you save some memory and resources). On slow machines, you notice it more. -- Cheers / Saludos, Carlos E. R. (from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)