From owner-freebsd-multimedia Wed Jun 17 06:36:20 1998 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) id GAA23403 for freebsd-multimedia-outgoing; Wed, 17 Jun 1998 06:36:20 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG) Received: from enigami.com (enigami.com [208.140.182.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (8.8.8/8.8.8) with ESMTP id GAA23396 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 1998 06:36:15 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from ckempf@enigami.com) Received: from singularity.enigami.com (singularity.enigami.com [208.140.182.42]) by enigami.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) with ESMTP id JAA21314 for ; Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:12:37 -0400 (EDT) Received: (from ckempf@localhost) by singularity.enigami.com (8.9.0/8.9.0) id JAA04330; Wed, 17 Jun 1998 09:11:45 -0400 (EDT) To: freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: x11perf & Xmark From: Cory Kempf Date: 17 Jun 1998 09:11:45 -0400 In-Reply-To: Adrian Wontroba's message of "Wed, 17 Jun 1998 03:00:22 +0100" Message-ID: Lines: 19 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.5/XEmacs 20.4 - "Emerald" Sender: owner-freebsd-multimedia@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org x11perf and Xmark don't seem to be compatible with each other. I tried running x11perf, which ran OK, then Xmark to interpret the results, but Xmark was unable to process the resuls of x11perf. Editing the results of x11perf to change '(or)' to '(xor)' resolved the problem. Either the Xmark script or x11perf's output should be fixed. +C PS: FWIW, my PII 333 w/ No 9 I128 board produced 7.757 Xmarks. -- Thinking of purchasing RAM from the Chip Merchant? Please read this first: Cory Kempf Macintosh / Unix Consulting & Software Development ckempf@enigami.com To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-multimedia" in the body of the message