Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:44:38 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:44:38 -0500 Received: from smtp.terra.es ([213.4.129.129]:27529 "EHLO tsmtp1.mail.isp") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:44:36 -0500 Date: Tue, 10 Dec 2002 21:51:25 +0100 From: Arador To: Stan Bubrouski Cc: rml@ufl.edu, conman@kolivas.net, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [BENCHMARK] 2.5.51 with contest Message-Id: <20021210215125.442fad17.diegocg@teleline.es> In-Reply-To: <3DF64852.9030006@ccs.neu.edu> References: <200212102245.19862.conman@kolivas.net> <3DF621D0.6040505@ccs.neu.edu> <1039545941.1831.849.camel@phantasy> <3DF64852.9030006@ccs.neu.edu> X-Mailer: Sylpheed version 0.8.6 (GTK+ 1.2.10; i386-debian-linux-gnu) Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 867 Lines: 21 On Tue, 10 Dec 2002 15:02:26 -0500 Stan Bubrouski wrote: > I disagree, 2.4.20 is the current stable kernel, it would > be nice to see how it compares to the current development, > what's faster, what's not... from Con's previous results > we can see that some things are indeed not as fast in 2.5.x > as in 2.4.x. It's just nice to be able to see the whole > picture. I often follow these threads for just this purpose. >From this point, if you compare 2.4 vs 2.5 you can just say: It's faster or slower. Comparing 2.5 vs 2.5 gives you a picture of what's gone better, and why. IMHO. Diego Calleja - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/