Should I migrate from Arch due to low repository speeds ?

[mehulved]

Why didn't you tell us ??? I am dying to try it since KDE4.1 has blown my mind in Ubuntu.

Filled-Void already did that in another thread. I have been using KDEmod 4.1 since then. The only reason I am using arch.

 

[Faun]

migration...ahem...ahem !

 

[shady_inc]

offtopic: kdemod4 is sooooo damn fast and sexy but where is kde control center ?

In what way is it better than KDE 4.1.?

 

[QwertyManiac]

KControlCenter is now System Settings (systemsettings)

 

[MetalheadGautham]

System Settings sucks. I wonder why they brought in that ugly app from Kubuntu.
I really miss KControlCenter.
And how can I switch to root mode for certain operations ?

 

[aditya.shevade]

LOLOLOL... Use Pacific.au mirror.... It is fast.

 

[mehulved]

For me, *mir.archlinux.fr is the fastest. Maybe it's cause I am on a different ISP.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

LOLOLOL... Use Pacific.au mirror.... It is fast.

For me, *mir.archlinux.fr is the fastest. Maybe it's cause I am on a different ISP.

I will find out the truth tonight.

Tonight is the night for some hectic downloading. I need to get CentOS 5.2 DVD ISO for testing purposes on my extra partition.

Along with that, I will download lots of software via pacman.

 

[FilledVoid]

Did any of you actually try Powerpill?

 

[gary4gar]

Yep, its fastest of the whole lot, but still not upto the mark. i get around 60kBps.
anyways, now i have a fully set up machine to i don't need to download much.

i am on KDE3.xx and if upgrade to KDE4.1. how much i have to download?

 

[Faun]

Yep, its fastest of the whole lot, but still not upto the mark. i get around 60kBps.
anyways, now i have a fully set up machine to i don't need to download much.

i am on KDE3.xx and if upgrade to KDE4.1. how much i have to download?

*farm3.static.flickr.com/2134/2122604649_e2f8e1a9b0_o.png
just testing

 

[MetalheadGautham]

In what way is it better than KDE 4.1.?

They compile their software using QT-Enhanced. This gives a fair bit of speed boost. And KDE4.1 recommends atleast 512MB RAM, but KDEmod runs like butter on my system.

KDEmod 4.1 on My rig with Pentium 4 2.66GHz CPU, 256MB DDR RAM runs FASTER than Ubuntu 8.04 on similar rig with Pentium D 3.06GHz with HT Technology and again 256MB DDR RAM.

So you get the idea of some speed difference ?

 

[Faun]

They compile their software using QT-Enhanced. This gives a fair bit of speed boost. And KDE4.1 recommends atleast 512MB RAM, but KDEmod runs like butter on my system.

KDEmod 4.1 on My rig with Pentium 4 2.66GHz CPU, 256MB DDR RAM runs FASTER than Ubuntu 8.04 on similar rig with Pentium D 3.06GHz with HT Technology and again 256MB DDR RAM.

So you get the idea of some speed difference ?

thanks metaaaaaaaaal


*farm3.static.flickr.com/2018/2107306750_134e5f27e5_o.png*farm3.static.flickr.com/2374/2106525027_ff8776f98d_o.png

 

[MetalheadGautham]

I am trying out Powerpill now.

 

[kalpik]

^^ About 300 MB.

thanks metaaaaaaaaal


*farm3.static.flickr.com/2018/2107306750_134e5f27e5_o.png*farm3.static.flickr.com/2374/2106525027_ff8776f98d_o.png

Banned for 2 days.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

Powerpill upped my 15kbps download speed to 53kbps. I guess this means I get to keep Arch.

@Kalpik: Its me who T159 targeted that comment against, not anyone else. I am sure he meant it in a light hearted way. Since today is Friendship Day, I don't want to see this thing happen. Kindly unban him and give him a second chance.

 

[FilledVoid]

Powerpill should increase the speeds you get. Technically its not increasing the speeds if I recall right its just utilizing your connection better.

 

[MetalheadGautham]

Powerpill should increase the speeds you get. Technically its not increasing the speeds if I recall right its just utilizing your connection better.

technically it just downloads from more than one mirror at a time. just the way I like it.

Metalink FTW!

 

[gary4gar]

KDEmod seems better with i686, than 64bit.

is that true?

 

[MetalheadGautham]

KDEmod seems better with i686, than 64bit.

is that true?

Because Arch was always an i686 centric OS. x86_64 development is quite active, but the more active arch veteran developers are mostly i686 guys, atleast, thats what their forum indicates. (see user profile, wiki and joined date of most devels). As for i586, well, thats the most half hearted approach I have seen. And a BIG waste of time.