<div dir="ltr"><div><div><div>Hi Nio, </div>we have until 22nd March before B2 testing, so if you'd be so kind as to draft up some instructions I'll set up a mini-page as a spreadsheet so volunteers can record results. I think such a thing will also be invaluable as we move to wards dual running with LXQt so we have a common set of benchmarks to test against. </div>Many thanks, </div>Phill. </div><div class="gmail_extra"> <div class="gmail_quote">On 11 March 2016 at 18:41, Nio Wiklund <<a href="mailto:nio.wiklund@gmail.com" target="_blank">nio.wiklund@gmail.com</a>> wrote: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">Hi Phill, The kernel has increased in size and it needs more RAM than before. Maybe systemd also means that Lubuntu needs more RAM than before. In order to know the exact figures, I think someone really needs to test it (which does take time to perform). I am quite busy nowadays. Maybe we can ask someone (else) to do it. I can help by describing how to do it (and to get some kind of comparison between Xenial and Trusty). Best regards Nio Den 2016-03-11 kl. 18:24, skrev Phill. Whiteside: <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Thanks Nio, I've prepped up the +1 page 'Advanced Methods' page for our upcoming 16.04 LTS [1]. From my reading of the page, it is mainly to see if there has been further 'RAM creep' for the minimum required from 14.04 to 16.04. Comments from you (and everyone else) greatly appreciated. Regards, Phill. 1. <a href="https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/AdvancedMethods+1" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Lubuntu/AdvancedMethods+1</a> On 11 March 2016 at 16:24, Nio Wiklund <<a href="mailto:nio.wiklund@gmail.com" target="_blank">nio.wiklund@gmail.com</a> <div><div class="h5"> <mailto:<a href="mailto:nio.wiklund@gmail.com" target="_blank">nio.wiklund@gmail.com</a>>> wrote: Den 2016-03-11 kl. 16:29, skrev Phill. Whiteside: Hi, can you recall at which release we no longer needed to add the force-pae flag for the 'M' series CPU's. Thanks, Phill. Hi Phill, *non-pae* I think that the last version of the Ubuntu flavours with a non-pae kernel is 12.04 LTS (kernel series 3.2). Lubuntu, Xubuntu and mini.iso were available with non-pae kernels (but not standard Ubuntu, and I don't know about the other flavours). 12.10 and later versions have only PAE 32-bit kernels (and 64-bit kernels). <a href="https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Lubuntu-fake-PAE" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Lubuntu-fake-PAE</a> <a href="http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://archive.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/dists/precise-updates/main/installer-i386/current/images/netboot/</a> *fake-pae* Fake-pae was used for Lubuntu 13.04 and 13.10. (Remember that Lubuntu 12.04 was supported for 18 months, so it overlapped Raring in time.) *forcepae* We need no longer use fake-pae (installed via a ppa). Instead we need the boot option forcepae, which was introduced with 14.04 LTS (kernel series 3.13). I have tested forcepae with my IBM Thinkpad T42 (with Pentium M) and it works also with 15.10 and Xenial (to be released as 16.04 LTS). Best regards Nio </div></div></blockquote> </blockquote></div> </div>