Sujet : Re: Linux upgrade.
De : 186283 (at) *nospam* ud0s4.net (186282@ud0s4.net)
Groupes : comp.os.linux.miscDate : 26. Dec 2024, 02:54:27
Autres entêtes
Organisation : wokiesux
Message-ID : <xwadnZocobbJKvH6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@earthlink.com>
References : 1 2 3 4 5
User-Agent : Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:78.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/78.13.0
On 12/25/24 4:30 PM, vallor wrote:
On Wed, 25 Dec 2024 02:15:44 -0500, "186282@ud0s4.net" <186283@ud0s4.net>
wrote in <BcucnUKMhO-9LPb6nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@earthlink.com>:
On 12/24/24 2:21 PM, rbowman wrote:
On Tue, 24 Dec 2024 01:31:38 -0500, 186282@ud0s4.net wrote:
>
Me, I just generally avoid serious kernel upgrades ...
just the usual auto-upgrades until I feel it's time to jump up two or
three whole distro versions. It's only 'home use' now, so I'm not so
worried about Vlad and Xi.
>
The Fedora box pulls down kernels frequently and is usually only a minor
version or two behind the latest. The Ubuntu box is still 6.8.0. They both
work fine for anything I do.
>
Zactly ... ordinary upgrades almost always get it done.
>
Again though, a busy outwards-facing server, some of
those point upgrades MAY be valuable.
I remembered this one:
"EXT4 Has A Very Nice Performance Optimization For Linux 6.11"
https://www.phoronix.com/news/Linux-6.11-EXT4
Maybe ... but it's STILL "mass storage" and will
be VASTLY slower than the CPU and such.
Oh well, better than tape reels and such ...
I kinda remember doing code 'overlays' with stuff
pulled off those spinny tapes ... like WOW slow !
The good 'ole "batch" days :-)
Turbo Pascal did 'overlays' too - and had to use
'em early on with limited PCs. However 'cheap'
HDDs had been invented so it wasn't THAT bad.
5 1/4 full-height Rodime 10 MEGAbyte HDD ...
that's the first 'cheap' one I used. Something
like $2600 1980s dollars. My poor boss spent
the whole weekend with the thing trying to
get it to boot the system. I looked at it on
Monday ... turned out he was just too IMPATIENT
and would restart over and over and over before
the boot routine could fully kick in :-)
Not sure if those were "MFM" or just "FM".
STILL kinda write software with the 'batch'
approach in mind. First bit does its stuff
and makes temp file, then the second works
on that and makes another temp file, on
and on until it's done. Advantage - you can
LOOK at those temp files for debugging clues.
Just include a "-P" 'preserve tempfiles' option.