On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:30:56 +0100 Hans Hagen wrote:

At 09:36 PM 11/7/2002 +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:

...

Hi all (or mainly the users of Unix-like systems)

after i've bought a new notebook and installed the recent Redhat Linux system i found that an updated ConTeXt runs very slow. First i thought that Hans had too much time and implemented a few thousand new features that need their time, but ...

... it is a queerer story. Here are the run times of an example document (many inline MP graphics, 18 pages, many terminal messages !!) on different terminal programs for X-Windows:

gnome-terminal: 2 min 18 sec konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec xterm: 1 min 5 sec directly on the console (no X-Windows): 58 sec

Normally i use the first. Hmm... ;-(

Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)

Can you check if kpsewhich runs ok? For instance

kpsewhich colo-ini.tex

kpsewhich cmr10.tfm

maybe no ls-R file is found and consulted, resulting in a full scan of the texmf file structure.

No, no. TeX finds its files very fast. I could improve that with a smaller texmf-tree, but 1+ min for the job is IMO okay; it runs 3xConTeXt, 2xTeXUtil and 2xMetaPost. The problem is the terminal program. It seems that the drawing of those many messages on the terminal needs much time. If i use a slow terminal, i.e. gnome-terminal, then the runtime increases. Can i switch off the messages generated by ConTeXt, this would help to compare. Jens

On Fri, 8 Nov 2002 08:28:14 -0500 Jan Hlavacek wrote:

On Fri, Nov 08, 2002 at 11:03:48AM +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:

...

On Fri, 08 Nov 2002 09:30:56 +0100 Hans Hagen wrote:

...

At 09:36 PM 11/7/2002 +0100, Jens-Uwe Morawski wrote:

...

...

...

gnome-terminal: 2 min 18 sec konsole (KDE-terminal): 1 min 30 sec xterm: 1 min 5 sec directly on the console (no X-Windows): 58 sec

Don't ask me for reasons, but if your ConTeXt is too slow, ask yourself if you run it on the right terminal -)

maybe no ls-R file is found and consulted, resulting in a full scan of the texmf file structure.

No, no. TeX finds its files very fast. I could improve that with a smaller texmf-tree, but 1+ min for the job is IMO okay; it runs 3xConTeXt, 2xTeXUtil and 2xMetaPost. The problem is the terminal program. It seems that the drawing of those many messages on the terminal needs much time. If i use a slow terminal, i.e. gnome-terminal, then the runtime increases.

Did you try to run context with output redirected to a file? How long does that take?

try texexec yourfile.tex > logfile

ahh, interesting idea. Now it is independent from the used terminal and a run needs about 50 seconds. Jens

another option is to choose another terminal font (bitmap versus outline)

I normally hide my terminal window (Win Cmd, too) at bigger jobs. Grüßlis vom Hraban! -- http://www.fiee.net http://www.ramm.ch ---