Re: X Windows Performance with DOC 2000

cfowler
2002-06-21T14:20:21Z

#1) What the hell is msys/fla process? I do not have my DOC mounted and
the load averages are around 1.99 when the module is loaded. M-SYS
for some reason can not seem to tell me what is going on here. If
this is a garbage collector then it is using too much resources. TO
fix this I issue rmmod doc. Now if I can remove the module then why
is GC doing this? I have interfaces that insert and remove the
module for each operation on flash. This takes time and is a
hack.

#2) Grub destroyed my first DOC. I use doc-lilo. Everytime I flash a
new kernel on the DOC I have to re-run doc-lilo.

#3) DOC is single source

#4) My contractor and I have not been too pleased with their support.

#5) I have to use putimage.exe and getimage.exe in DOS to
flash other units. This means in development I have to
maintain a dos envrionment. We are strictly linux in development

#6) I have to load the driver as a module to obey the GPL of the
kernel. I prefer to have it built in. This makes upgrades easier.

#7) Writing to the thing is slooooowwww.

#8) CF is so much easier using in devel and production. DOM to me
seems better

On Fri, 2002-06-21 at 10:12, David Woodhouse wrote:
>
> cfowler@outpostsentinel.com said:
> > I'm actually tired of using M-SYS's driver. Their tech-support sucks
> > and I hate using putimage in DOS. I'm switching to DOM and Compact
> > Flash. I'll guess some other company will get my order for 10,000
> > units.
>
> What problems did you have with the real Linux driver?
>
> --
> dwmw2
>
>
>
>