On Sun, 17 Feb 2002 07:33:00 -0500, Tom Brinkman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Saturday 16 February 2002 08:14 pm, Sridhar Dhanapalan wrote: > > On Sat, 16 Feb 2002 18:13:39 -0500, Tom Brinkman > > > Nothin scientific, I used the clock on the microwave > > > (computer's in the kitchen) to test mozilla, and kernel compiles > > > ... ie, � a minute ;~> i686, or athlon, proved slower more times > > > than not. Specially with kernels compiled for i686 or athlon, > > > rather than Mandrake's 'stock' i586 kernels. Even against testing > > > usin 'optimized' 'trimmed down' kernels to run the tests. > > > > I think that the more you 'optimise' code, the longer it can take to > > compile. > > Well, in the case of the kernel, I used the 'stock' Mandrake > .config and only hand edited for cpu type. Compile times (default > /boot/.config) were unchanged. Triming out some uneeded stuff with > 'make xconfig' produced a smaller kernel. Using that kernel optimized > only for athlon, then a compile of the kernel (using the default > .config again) was actually a touch slower.
For the most part, I'm inclined to agree with you. There are some exceptions, though. For example, the -mjc 2.4 kernel branch (http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/mjc/linux-2.4/) is quite an improvement over the stock kernel. It includes interesting patches like Rik van Riel's Reverse Mapping VM, the Preemptible Kernel Patch and the O(1) Scheduler. The Gentoo distro use it as part of their default kernel. -- Sridhar Dhanapalan "Windows is not done until Lotus 123 won't run." -- Old Microsoft internal slogan
Want to buy your Pack or Services from MandrakeSoft? Go to http://www.mandrakestore.com
