No, not on the same cable as the CD, slave on the first cable. There was something in
the install guide that said Linux had to be on the first if there were two IDE
controllers, but could be either master or slave on just the one controller. So the
CD is on one controller, the two HD's are on the other. The CD-R is separate,
external on an Adaptec SCSI card.
I read the sysconfig/harddisks and the man hdparm and it suggested the default for
the Western Digital was probably wrong, that I should set something called
to 4 to 8 on the Western Digital drive. It also warned that messing with hd
parameters could destroy things.
Except, I have no clue as to how/where to change that setting, how to back it up
before changing that setting, and how to restore the backed up version if the change
makes the system unbootable. I do know that I need to know things first. Fixing that
will therefore have to wait until I know more. I don't want to reinstall from
I will save your email.
>I have an amazingly similar set up to yours (600 MHz P3, 256 M, G400). I recently
>upgraded from RH 7.2 to RH 7.3. I am not seeing the same slowness you are seeing.
>I would be suspicious of the second drive. Is it on the same cable (ie., IDE port)
>as the CDRom? If the CDR is the master and the HD is the slave, you are probably
>limiting the HD to CD speed settings. If you look in the messages log in /var/log
>there are typically some boot up messages about the HD set up. You might look in
>/etc/sysconfig/harddrive (ummm, that's close but probably not exactly correct -- not
>at my Linux box right now) to see what hdparm settings are being used for the second
>Holler for more help if these thoughts don't get you on the right path.
>> I have a P3-550 with 256M RAM.
>> Not great. Not a slug.
>> Linux is veeerrrrry slow to do anything on the desktop, KDE or Gnome.
>> Windows/programs take forever to open.
>> Where do I look for the reason for the slowness? Surely there is a setting I am
>> missing or have done badly. (I would prefer to work in command line or Gnome, KDE
>> reminds me too much of Windows.)
>> It identified the video card on install (Matrox G400) and the Viewsonic monitor was
>> listed, IIRC. It runs OS/2, occasionally WinNT, and I put in a second HD just for
>> Linux. Actions on the other OSes are speedy enough. Would the second HD set up as
>> slave be that much slower than the first? The diagram for jumpers to set it up as
>> slave was pretty clear. It's a 10 GB Western Digital and the old one is a 20GB IBM,
>> but both purchased at about the same time 2-1/2 years ago.
>> Things work okay so, the printers are fine, the cable modem is fine, ir
>> recognizes/reads from the CD and the SCSI CD-R.
>> Suggestions for hunting are appreciated.
>> Judy Russell