On 5/24/06, Alex <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Using CFLAGS="-Os" or CFLAGS="-O2" is much more effective on
> a desktop system and can shave off more than 30% of the size. This is
> because larger binaries (like the HUGE ones produced by -O3)
> take longer to load, and occupy more RAM.
Is that always true? I mean, I'm not loading and unloading applications
the whole time. Additionally I've enough RAM for all applications I use
and so I can't imagine that (on my computer with my use) applications,
which are slower and smaller, can be faster than applications which are
bigger and faster.
It depends entirely on the application and processor. Compared to -O2,
somethings are faster with -Os and some things are slower. Same with
-O3. It can even depend upon the options given to an app, for example
bzip2 -9 will be faster with one level of optimization than with
another, while bzip2 -1 can give the complete opposite results.
I chose -Os for my system, but only after testing the things that I
care most about (compression, dm-crypt encryption, some media
encoding) to see what was best overall. But even that was a
comprimise, and the real deciding factor was that it took a lot less
time to compile with -Os compared to -O3.
-Richard
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
