Date: Sun, 29 Jun 2003 19:33:41 -0500 From: Vulpes Velox <kitbsdlists@HotPOP.com> To: Joe Pokupec <joepok@ninestar.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: 11 Hour Installs on KDE? Message-ID: <20030629193341.3630901c.kitbsdlists@HotPOP.com> In-Reply-To: <BB2341B8.11DF9%joepok@ninestar.com> References: <3EFDE51A.30907@potentialtech.com> <BB2341B8.11DF9%joepok@ninestar.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sat, 28 Jun 2003 12:59:36 -0800 Joe Pokupec <joepok@ninestar.com> wrote: > Hey Guys, > > Thanks for your input and explanations. Here's the part I don't understand > (very simplistic view). Both machines previously had Red Hat 9 installed on > them. I decided that I didn't want to pay Red Hat for their up2date feature > on each machine and decided to go back to BSD with a GUI so I could go back > to the trusty, and free ports feature(s)... > > RH9 took less than 15 minutes to install and boot for each machine. It has > the Blue Wave GUI and I would imagine is pretty bloated as well. So, from > this point of view, how can one OS take 15 minutes, while the other take 15 > hours (and counting)? lol, very simply... If it is taking 15 minutes to install it is not compiling any thing or very little. I would suggest you use /stand/sysinstall or pkg_add to install KDE if you are worried about time. If you want a quick install the pkg_add is the way to go, but it should be noted that this is not very pretty since it is not heavily optimized. I personally like optimizing every thing with either -O2 or -O3. This takes awhile, but for the most part it has been worth it, from my experience. > The machines are Pentium II, 333Mhz and 400 Mhz units (both are Dells). Each > machine has 256 Megs of RAM, and one of the machines has a 60 gig drive...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20030629193341.3630901c.kitbsdlists>