Release Candidates :: DSL v2.4RC1

Thanks a lot for the "Usaved extension...." reminder option, I find it very useful. Two more questions (test machine is a vaio laptop pcg-fx802, 1,5 Ghz, 256 Ram):

- RAM: with 2.4 RC1 I have 9% of RAM working with basic frugal installation (= no extension running, no uci, no network, no deamons, nothing); I don't remember that it was so high with 2.3; is that a consequence of the 64 cloops?
- Processes: I also have 24 processes running at x starts with basic frugal (20 with 2.3); is that also a consequence of 64 cloops?

Thanks for enlighting me and congratulation for this extraordinary release.
yours
z

this is awesome, any idea when the final might be out ?

... the formulation of my first question was not so lucky: I actually said that when x starts, dsl already uses 9% of my 256 mb RAM (14% with wireless on an when using firefox in order to write this message), which was not so high in my opinion with dsl 2.3; what does dsl stock in the RAM?
Thanks again
yours
z

9% of 256 is very little for a modern operating system, particularly if that is including cache/buffers. Compare this to the 30% or more that Suse usually sucks up from 256mb, without doing anything. And that's with Fluxbox....i can only imagine what it'd be when running KDE.

If it is actually more than what was used in 2.3 that might be something to look into, though.

Thank you mikshaw for your answer.

I find it very little, too; I just wonder if we can keep the RAM usage under 10% at x starts (without specific options) in comparison with 2.3, which needed 8% at x starts on my laptop; the same for the processes needed at x start: is it possible to keep them at 20 or not up to 23? As you suggest, even with Ram usage around 10% and used processes between 24-27 at x start wihout specific options, I find the 2.4 RC1 incredible powerful.

One more observation on something strange to me:

a) I have dsl 2.4 installed (frugal, grub bootloader) on HD, up and running;
b) I have dsl 2.3 burned on a CD; I put the CD in my machine, and I reboot in order to boot from CD (my first boot option in my bios);
c) my machine doesn't boot directly on the CD (= dsl boot prompt), but gives me the Grub prompt with my resolutions for 2.4;
d) I make 'enter' in order to get the appropiate resolution for my hardware, dsl runs as usual, and it uses the iso image (dsl 2.3) on the CD, instead of refering to hda1 (i.e. dsl 2.4); so it gives me what I wanted, but...
e)... it was impossible for me to have the dsl boot prompt of dsl 2.3 when booting from the CD...; has anyone else observed the same?

yours
z

Next Page...
original here.