On Sun, Mar 27, 2011 at 11:45:50PM +0200, Julien BODIN wrote: > Actually I just want a reliable and fast system which can be > virtualized. I don't want to use CPU or RAM for other things that I > really use. > But this is not related to lfs, because I'm doing it just because I > want to know how a distribution work. > > I was just curious about the fact that a lfs can or can't be faster > than another distribution (with same versions, configuration and > hardware), but in LFS we do not use optimization with gcc (as it can > be done with gentoo, for example, or with archlinux) so I think it > will be slower. > With the same versions (everywhere), same configuration (including e.g. CFLAGS), and same hardware - everything is identical (by definition). Nobody is stopping you using your own CFLAGS : your distro, your rules. But, please remember that any test results from optimisations are changed by: different hardware (newer generations of CPUs, different cache sizes, different amounts of RAM) and different toolchain versions. If you want to create your own tests, and run them enough times to be sure that your results are repeatable, then don't let me stop you.
In my own case, I was an early user of amd64. Finding tests which were meaningful to what I was doing took quite a lot of time, as did running them. In my experience, there is a lot of variablility in how long things take to run - I wouldn't have much confidence that testing an extra -fdo-it-faster switch was reliably identified in execution times, except in very specialized cases. In practice, at various times different distros have different compilers, as well as varying versions of some other packages, and different compile switches and optimizations. ĸen -- das eine Mal als Tragödie, das andere Mal als Farce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-support FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
