SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
Hi I installed slackware 9 four days ago and found that KDE loads slow. Also the kernel boots up with loads of stuff I think i dont need. One way of making the kernel faster is to compile it with your custom settings. Now what would i require for that. For example would i need graphics card drivers, mobo drivers, sound card and usb drivers etc. Any help wwould be appreciated..
Last edited by no noob_slacker; 11-18-2003 at 11:01 PM.
im not sure I know what your asking, that sounds like a windows user type of question (not that thats a bad thing) but the Linux kernel comes with 99% of the drivers you need (for basic computer use). you dont need to go scrounging around to find the specific driver for your motherboard and hard drive. they'r is most likely already in the kernel source.
so to answer your question: you need the kernel source, and extencive knowledge about your hardware.
my opinion is "if it aint broke, dont fix it" if your running KDE its probably gona be slower than windows anyways, recompiling the kernel wont help you. try a lighter WM, I myselfe have a slow computer, but using a minimal install and fluxbox, my Slackware run faster than windows. (all on the default kernel)
Originally posted by no noob_slacker conflicting statements. Some say that you cannot add all the stuff to kernel meaning that you load modules. Now I am confused
In my opinion, it is better to compile the support as modules rather than into the kernel. It helps keep the kernel smaller and small kernel=fast kernel.
There are exceptions to this...some things need to be, or just work better if compiled into the kernel. Other things (such as hardware specific support) are better off as modules. The modules are autoloaded. The bottom line is that the system runs better when the kernel only has compiled into it what needs to be...the rest are modules...IMO of course.
I hope this makes sense. Some could even argue that it's a matter of preference as well.
Yes But I was specificaly remarking about filesystems. Ext2, ext3 and reiser should be compiled into the kernel. Support for whatever is your primary hard disk (be it IDE or SCSI) is also required in the kernel. Basically, if you need it to get you off the ground then put it into the kernel. Audio, video, network, other non-critical filesystems, and whatever else can be (and possibly SHOULD be) made as modules.
One thing that took me a while to work out was make EVERYTHING you can as modules. In other words, if you have a soundblaster card, compile the module for it and EVERY OTHER card. That way, if you get a new piece of hardware, you don't have to recompile the kernel. I've done this and the modules take up about 15-18 Mb per kernel. It's a good idea unless you're REALLY strapped for hard disk space.
What about getting the config file from /boot? Just a little
cp /boot/config /usr/src/linux/
Gives the kernel and modules config...modify from there.
Cheating...perhaps. But at least you have a model to follow. Just trim out the excess modules. Don't have ISA? Take it out! If you take out something you need then you'll get errors and learn.