| |
| |
| |
|
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29
Comments:
<0> LSzilard: fdisk and nano fstab
<1> whitecap: if you *had* to choose between those 2
<0> fdisk soesn't do mountpoints unless you use LABELS whish i haven't messed with
<2> fdisk doesn't lay out mountpoints, so the question's moot
<0> i set the fs size and type with fdisk then nanao fstab to do what i want
<1> i gutted my PC and left nothing in there but an old 5400 rpm 80GB disk, and an iMation CD drive, and I loaded Ubuntu on the system -- this was around Oct. 2005 -- i quickly ripped thru the install -- it made 2 single mount points - / and /swap -- and it gave like 76 GB to /.
<1> i went with all the defaults
<1> Ubunto ***igned 76 GB to root?
<2> that's correct behavior for a desktop machine.
<1> weird.
<1> er...."Ubuntu", rather
<1> zetawoof: i know, but what about /var and /opt and and /home, and all that?
<2> There's no point in separating those out for a desktop machine.
<3> they're just as happily directories as mountpoints
<2> Only means you'll have to figure out how to resize them when things get tight.
<1> i remember the old Bezerkely BSD days when /bin had its own mount point
<1> zetawolf: i guess
<3> I was never entirely happy with Slowaris, symlinking /bin and /lib into /usr
<4> holy ****...encoding video from mpg to divx at 204fps...that dont seem right
<1> Liandrin: why would making those symbolic links into /usr not make you happy?
<3> LSzilard, because that means that in the event of disaster, I have to have _two_ partitions functioning and mountable
<5> Teakk: don't worry it's just saving a little space. You'll be able to make out the people's faces as those blobs of pinkish/tanish color on the screen
<4> libolt, at full screen its still as clear as the orginal
<0> /home and /var/log should be nfs anyway =-/
<1> Liandrin: what is necessaril wrong with having 2 partitions functioning and mountable?
<2> whitecap: for a desktop machine?
<1> Liandrin: what is necessarily wrong with having 2 partitions functioning and mountable?
<0> zetawoof: depends on where the desktop is
<1> Liandrin: in the event of a disaster, or otherwise?
<1> i don't get it.
<3> LSzilard, the root partition doesn't contain anything useful -- not sh, not fsck, not ANYTHING
<3> LSzilard, everything's in /usr except config files, essentially
<0> zetawoof: office desktop, you bet. my home ? sure. yours ? maybe not
<1> unless you don't have root encapsulated in some sort of volume management scheme
<2> LSzilard: no, root's got to contain a shell
<1> but then......we're talking *ux-based, home-desktop machines --- it is highly doubtful that any home user is going to be thinking about volume management
<2> otherwise you can't run your init script
<1> zetawoof: true
<0> heh, /etc/bash
<2> that
<2> that's why shells go in /bin instead of /usr/bin
<0> originally the way it was
<1> in fact, I've heard that running RAID 5, with volume management for hard-core Quake4 gamers is a waste of time.
<0> _everything_ needed to boot was in /etc
<1> even hardware RAID 5
<1> let alone RAID 0,1
<3> for gamerz, it is
<3> but I used to administer all the boxes at a largish ISP
<1> most of the I/O benchmarks running Quake4 in RH9 show the best performance for a *single-disk* drive system
<3> having to boot from the bloody Solaris CD because /usr got pooched is not my idea of a fun way to spend an afternoon
<1> (preferably SCSI-320)
<2> These are the folks water-cooling their RAM and installing physics accelerator cards, remember.
<1> right
<4> wow, with 'Video Preview' on, it goes at ~35fps ... turn it off, and it spikes to ~200fps for the conversion
<1> most of these physics-engine cards are simply mixed bit-map tossers with rasterizing and Z-buffering.
<1> optimized bit-map tossers
<2> More specifically, most of those physics accelerator cards are used for nothing beyond a few simple particle systems.
<1> and with 2 of these cards, T-bridged, you can see frame rates in Quake4 approaching 400 fps, sustained, during heavy gameplay
<1> PCI-E, of course
<0> Liandrin: what? you didn't have to load it from tape ?
<1> i can't imagine what Quake 4 would look like, at 1600 x 1200, 32-bit color, 400 fps.
<1> it must look almost better than reality
<3> whitecap, fortunately, I came along after that
<3> some day, I'd like to have a game run in 1600x1200, at any bit depth, synchronized with my refresh rate
<1> too bad that the human eye really can't tell the difference between 24 frames / sec (NTSC) and 400 frames per second
<3> NTSC is 60 fields per second, not 24 frames per second
<3> the latter is cinema
<1> Liandrin: ahh.......sync'ed with your monitor's refresh rate. There's the rub.
<3> and the flicker fusion frequency is around 72 Hz for most people
<0> pfhht. all my games are RL. darts, pool, chess, etc
<3> hm, I better go look that up, in case I've just put my foot in it
<1> Liandrin: yep. i can see flicker at 70 Hz vertical refresh, if I look a "couple inches" down below the lower right corner of my 17" monitor, with a white-screen, at arm's length.
<2> 72 is flicker fusion, but update fusion (?) is lower yet
<3> hm, it's actually quite a bit lower, but "circumstances vary", in a nutshell
<3> cinema frames are projected twice, to give an effective rate of 48 Hz
<3> TV uses interlacing to fake 50/60
<2> 60 fps video looks really fluid. Even 30 fps can look good if the motion isn't too fast.
<1> Liandrin: NTSC spec'ed 24 frames /sec, for minimum "fluid motion", for most human observers.
<1> back in, oh, I dunno, around 1955.
<1> before "flicker" became detectable
<3> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flicker_fusion_threshold
<2> heh, motion fusion can occur as low as 16 Hz
<1> zetawolf: i have a PCI 2.0-based nVidia 5200 vid card (256 MB) -- i typically sustain around 72 fps in Quake3, at 1152x864x32, but with most of the antialiasing and anisotropic nonsense "goodies" turned off. Frankly, I've pwn3d just about everyone, over my little 1.6 Mb WiFi pipe.
<2> LSzilard: Um.. good for you?
<1> zetawolf: and the visual experience and sense of "immersion" is still fairly "rich".
<1> zetawoof: ..and not good for the pwn33s.
<4> so, i have a date with an ex that I havent seen in nearly a decade...yeah, this is going to be FUN </sarcasam>
<6> why did you agree to do it?
<3> LSzilard, I'm a demanding 2D user, the last card I bought ****ed at 3D _when I bought it_
<1> i've benchmarked by pitiful, P.O.S. PCI 2.0 nVidia 5200 card, and it is giving me around 355 MB/sec throughput.
<4> twonkbat, dude, shes hot
<4> :P
<6> Teakk: lol
<5> LSzilard: and yet you'd get whipped by someone with a geforce ti 4200 :)
<6> Teakk: good enough :D
<0> on irc all ex's can be so very _hot_
<4> whitecap, grabbin her pic now
<0> of course ;)
<4> http://myspace-589.vo.llnwd.net/00232/98/54/232054589_l.jpg <-- Jennifer
<1> libolt: truth? ping and sk33lz are more important than raw hardware.
<4> she was my 'first' in bed....
<0> my first was a ringer for the girl on the Labaryth
<3> Labrynth?
<4> her fiancee and her just broke up as well...so, besides her and i taking eachothers virginity, and being ex's of eachother, we have other things in common now too...we have ex-fiancees
<4> whitecap, GOOD movie
<0> Liandrin: that's it
<1> i introduced Kevin Smith to Claire Forlani
<4> and that Jennifer Connaly ... damn
<5> LSzilard: I was referring to framerate more than anything :) I had a 5200 in my mediabox, was pitiful compared to my older 4200, thanks to nvidia's naming convention :)
<1> (after i was done with her. small world)
<3> I wouldn't so much mind if the frame rate was unsynchronized with my refresh rate, as long as it consistently exceeded it
<1> Liandrin: find an even divisor between the 2
<1> Liandrin: and set your driver to match it
<7> how can i remove expiration in redhat9.0 ??
<8> erwer: upgrade to a newer version ?
<6> why is it people still insist on using rh9 or lower? :/
<0> i think he's trying to avoid paying for RHEL
<6> was rh9 the last free from cost release?
<0> there was both
<1> the fewer raw MFLOPS that your vid card has to do, the better - always seek even multiples (or divisors) for your monitor's refresh rate with your vid card's theoretical max frame rate, and the driver you're using
<4> <DarthSemiAway> 2000 mockingbirds = 2 kilamockingbirds <-- wow, those bash.org admins let anything in these days
<6> probably just have an autoclicker on the mouse
<6> approve approve approve
<1> i'm getting 358 MB/sec out of my "pathetic" and "antiquated" PCI 2.0 -based system, with a PCI 2.0-compliant nVidia 5200 card (my system doesn't even have an AGP slot) - 1152 x 864 x 5 (32-bit color, 2^5 =32) x 72 fps = ~ 358 MB/sec.
<1> of course, PCI-E cards can handle around 6 GB/sec, but damned if I can see the difference, except for all kinds of subtle eye-candy like drop shadows & transparency and over-sampled Z-buffering & "shimmer".
<1> which i can't see, anyway
<1> 8-bit shadows, on all 3 color channels
<4> LSzilard> i'm getting 358 MB/sec out of my "pathetic" and "antiquated" PCI 2.0 -based system, with a PCI 2.0-compliant nVidia 5200 card (my system doesn't even have an AGP slot) - 1152 x 864 x 5 (32-bit color, 2^5 =32) x 72 fps = ~ 358 MB/sec. <-- yeah, you lost me
<4> You lost me at "I'm"
<4> anyways, g'nite all
<1> Treakk: bring up a calculator, and multiply 1152 x 864 x 5 x 72, and you answer will be 358 million and change, in bytes.
<1> Teakk: bring up a calculator, and multiply 1152 x 864 x 5 x 72, and you answer will be 358 million and change, in bytes. That is the overall throughput I'm getting, through my computer's PCI 2.0 bus, from the nVidia 5200 vid card.
<1> Teakk: I'm running my screen resolution at 1152 x 864, with 32-bit color (2 to the 5th power = 32), and my avg. sustained frame rate is about 72 frames per second.
<2> LSzilard: Bring up a calculator, and press the "zero" key. That is, within a reasonable approximation, about how much most of us care.
<1> that equals roughly 358 MB/sec.
<9> zetawoof: dude, I think thats even a little too much
<6> :P
<1> zetawoof: did it occur to you that I wasn't really addressing my remarks to your "most of us"?
<2> (Also, last time I checked, LSzilard, your graphics card isn't working as a raw framebuffer.)
<0> 0
<1> zetawoof: there is no such thing as a "raw framebuffer".
<2> Sure there is. I've used one.
<9> Theres such a thing as a raw frambuffer, go look at your kernel source again
<1> the idealized "raw framebuffer" would consist of a very fast CCD device, directly coupled to the grids of your LCD or plasma display's elements, or to the deflection plates of a CRT tube.
<1> i doubt that anyone has ever tried such a thing.
<9> Oh for ****'s sake
<10> anyone ever hear of xmms not loading song times correctly?
<9> I forgot that Ubuntu doesnt include the mp3 codec.
<11> times are all huge
<0> syn-ack: sure it does, if you include the right repositories
Return to
#linux
or
Go to some related
logs:
StnyFtpd perl
#MissKitten
ciugu
php3 on apache2.2
#linuxhelp
How many hundred rooms does Buckingham palace have
#linux
Bad CPU type in executable mysql
#AllNiteCafe
#linux
|
|
