Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?
From: Jon Harrop (usenet_at_jdh30.plus.com)
Date: 07/04/05
- Next message: Linønut: "Re: How to Deal with Certain FUD Pieces (was: SWUP - Another reason why Trustix has a lower TCO than Microsoft)"
- Previous message: S.Heenan: "Re: How to Deal with Certain FUD Pieces"
- In reply to: Justin: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Next in thread: krf: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Reply: krf: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Reply: Christopher Browne: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Date: Mon, 04 Jul 2005 01:57:21 +0100
I have found Debian to be excellent. I switched from Red Hat about 5 years
ago and never looked back.
Justin wrote:
[Gentoo]
> It is a massive waste of time.
I've heard that from other people.
> Compiling from source offers
> virtually no performance increase over pre-compiled binaries;
Ironically, I'm going to have to disagree with you there. You can sometimes
get substantial performance improvements exactly where you want them by
compiling from source.
I did this with ghostscript by fetching the Debian package source using
"apt-get source", altering it to compile with optimisation flags for my CPU
and then installing the replacement package. As ghostscript uses a lot of
tight array loops with integer and floating point maths, it sped up
considerably when switching to CPU-specific code.
-- Dr Jon D Harrop, Flying Frog Consultancy http://www.ffconsultancy.com
- Next message: Linønut: "Re: How to Deal with Certain FUD Pieces (was: SWUP - Another reason why Trustix has a lower TCO than Microsoft)"
- Previous message: S.Heenan: "Re: How to Deal with Certain FUD Pieces"
- In reply to: Justin: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Next in thread: krf: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Reply: krf: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Reply: Christopher Browne: "Re: Debian, Arch or Gentoo?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
Relevant Pages
|
