On 12/10/2014 06:03 PM, Bruce Dubbs wrote: > William Harrington wrote: > >>> Don't get me wrong though, I have nothing against you doing this, but >>> doesn't it make it little less true for someone? I mean, obviously the >>> former value was from a system under (average) load and the second one >>> is from a sort of base system with no additional software running. Why >>> not add these two, then divide them by two to get a value that's mostly >>> true for base system and systems under (average) load (ie, a wm, desktop >>> or simply just X). >>> >>> -- >>> Note: My last name is not Krejzi. >> >> Not to mention, having an SBU when using multiple CPU's or cores when the >> rest of the book has SBU's based with one CPU or one core, and when the >> LFS book SBU is measured with one core/cpu. May as well put in every book >> an SBU based on multiple jobs when the system has so many CPU's or cores. >> I suggest leaving the SBU as if someone is using one CPU or one core. >> >> Here's one major issue with the SBU and then stating the SBU when using 4 >> CPU's or cores, >> >> When the first SBU is measured it is using one CPU or one core. When >> using >> multiple jobs, the SBU is not going to be accurate, especially when >> someone moves the build to a different machine. >> >> I would suggest to leave the SBU with one CPU or core. Adding a note with >> machine specifics could be used for SBU's when using multiple CPU's or >> cores. > > I agree with you for the most part, but for the very long running > builds, just waiting 2 hours or more (aka Libreoffice, webkit, etc) just > to get a SBU value is not a good use of developer time. > > I prefer -j1 for timing, but I also think that increasing that value > (with documentation) for very large packages is reasonable. > > -- Bruce >
Not everybody has more than one machine (that can be used for this task), so it could be anticipated that majority will build the software on their currently running system. Given that with different system load SBU for such a large package can change drastically as noted, it would be nice to use something in between those two values, if you are already going to build while system is under different load. -- Note: My last name is not Krejzi.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
