RE: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-16 Thread Rich Rudnick
On Thu, 2001-11-15 at 10:08, Brooks R. Robinson wrote: | | linked code). (Does anyone have benchmark results?) If I remember | | correctly, it is debian policy to use '-g' and then strip non-library | | binaries. I'm sure I'll get howls for suggesting it, but I think that | | the policy

Re: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-15 Thread Timothy H. Keitt
My guess is that getting rid of '-g' (i.e., debugging symbols) would be the most profitable optimization. My understanding is that the debug symbols cannot be stripped from library code, so you are probably thrashing your cpu cache unnecessarily when running debian binary packages (at least

RE: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-15 Thread Brooks R. Robinson
| linked code). (Does anyone have benchmark results?) If I remember | correctly, it is debian policy to use '-g' and then strip non-library | binaries. I'm sure I'll get howls for suggesting it, but I think that | the policy should be to not use '-g' in the stable distribution. Greetings,

Re: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-15 Thread Timothy H. Keitt
Brooks R. Robinson wrote: | linked code). (Does anyone have benchmark results?) If I remember | correctly, it is debian policy to use '-g' and then strip non-library | binaries. I'm sure I'll get howls for suggesting it, but I think that | the policy should be to not use '-g' in the stable

RE: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-15 Thread Brooks R. Robinson
| | linked code). (Does anyone have benchmark results?) If I remember | | correctly, it is debian policy to use '-g' and then strip non-library | | binaries. I'm sure I'll get howls for suggesting it, but I think that | | the policy should be to not use '-g' in the stable distribution. | |

Re: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-15 Thread Mark Ferlatte
On Thu, Nov 15, 2001 at 10:16:37AM -0500, Timothy H. Keitt wrote: My guess is that getting rid of '-g' (i.e., debugging symbols) would be the most profitable optimization. My understanding is that the debug symbols cannot be stripped from library code, so you are probably thrashing your cpu

About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-14 Thread spear
Hi there ! I was wondering, about the fact some Linux distributions are optimized for i586 processors : what does it really change ? Are there any benchmarks comparing a distribution giving the choice of both i386/i586 ? Thanks in advance ! Mathias

Re: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-14 Thread Michael Danicich
No benchmarks on hand, but I can tell you the difference between them is that the i586 distros (like Linux-Mandrake) are compiled using gcc's optimizations. Theoretically, using the most advanced instruction set you can will improve performance, as newer chips do things like combine multiple

Re: About the i586 / i386 ' optimized releases ' differences ?

2001-11-14 Thread Andras BALI
On Wed, Nov 14, 2001 at 01:53:20PM +0100, spear wrote: I was wondering, about the fact some Linux distributions are optimized for i586 processors : what does it really change ? Are there any benchmarks comparing a distribution giving the choice of both i386/i586 ? I don't know any, but you