Re: [Nolug] Gentoo?

Ron Johnson wrote:
> On Wed, 2003-07-30 at 23:22, Manuel Lora wrote:
>
>>Hello,
>>
>>I've been using Linux for years, and Gentoo for a few months. I finally
>>decided to go for it one day, after a hard drive died :)
>>
>>It's been really good to me. The setup is not necessarily tricky (just RTFM)
>>but long, depending on the CPU and RAM. It will take several hours (or days)
>>to get the basic system (stage1) installed. Alternatively, you can install
>>pre-compiled stuff. I went the more "pure" way and compiled everything for
>>the CPU.
>
>
> Is *****all*the*time***** burnt compiling a system from source?
> Things like X, GNOME, KDE (and you'll need libraries for both) and
> OOo take a really long time to compile.
>
> On almost everything except crypto, you get a better speed boost
> by using more RAM, h/w 3D and faster disks.
>
> There have been lotsa threads regarding this on the Debian lists,
> and that's the consensus, after someone actually did time tests.
>

But then what's the point of having that RAID0 compile farm?

I can qualitatively ;) say that I get better performance after compiling
X and the kernel, but I believe a lot of that is because the Crusoe
emulates the i386. And if you already have a slow disk. and/or your ram
is maxed out, which is the case for most laptops...then you want to
squeeze everything out of it, right?

So what is the speed difference from source v. binary? a couple
percent? Was this test done on lots of different hardware? What about
software that takes advantage of things like MMX etc.

(not calling anyone out, just really curious, google hasn't told me yet)

___________________
Nolug mailing list
nolug@nolug.org
Received on 07/31/03