You asked for it! and here it is! Ultimate Edition LITE !
http://ultimateedition.info/ultimate_ed ... -2-8-lite/
TheeMahn wrote:I will soon have a "How to" using Lite to boot the entire system into ram for those with the extra memory, slows down boot time, but it totally flys after the fact:{my emphasis}
caieng wrote:TheeMahn wrote:I will soon have a "How to" using Lite to boot the entire system into ram for those with the extra memory, slows down boot time, but it totally flys after the fact:{my emphasis}
May I ask:
a. what is the definition of "extra" memory?
b. why isn't all of Linux ALREADY in memory, if the OS establishes that the user possesses sufficient memory?
c. how can a user ELIMINATE those parts of Linux, not needed for a particular application, so that THERE WOULD BE sufficient memory to load the remnants into system RAM, instead of paging out to the hard disk?
d. Is the browser I use with Windows 98 (SeaMonkey 1.13), which loads in just 2 seconds on a PIII system at 1.1GHz, (compared with 10 seconds for FireFox on the most recent release of KDE (PCLinuxOS) on the same computer) faster because windows 98 has loaded the browser into memory during boot up, or because obsolete SeaMonkey is so much smaller than modern FireFox?
e. I have the impression, not yet confirmed, but a suspicion, that Ultimate Edition LITE ALREADY has some components loaded into memory, which may explain why I have faster times for loading FireFox with Ultimate Edition lite, compared with PCLOS LXDE. Am I correct in that assumption, or is Ultimate Edition Lite simply faster, without yet loading the browser into memory?
Thanks for your help.
CAI ENG
caieng wrote:Thanks TheeMahn, for taking the time to respond to my questions. Much appreciated.
When I inquired about the definition of "extra" memory, what I meant, (I should have been more precise, sorry) was this: one of my open box systems displays on the desktop a constantly changing text representing system information, in particular, the amount of memory currently in use, and the amount available. It also shows "swap usage" and cpu activity as a percentage. "Swap usage", as I write this, is zero, RAM: 378 MB/0.98 GB.
In other words, apparently, it would seem as though I am exploiting only about one third of my available memory. Perhaps I am not correctly interpreting the data, or perhaps the data itself is inaccurate, I don't know how it is procured.
Thanks again, for all of your comments, I look forward to the new edition, and will be glad to provide beta testing, if it would be useful. Why did I care? A tester on the downside. Most do not understand what I do.
CAI ENG
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest