| 1 |
Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 2 |
> Whenever I see a write-up of Gentoo, it's describe as a system |
| 3 |
> similar to BSD "ports" where you build packages from source. |
| 4 |
> The main benefit claimed for this approach is that you get |
| 5 |
> better performance because all executables are optimized for |
| 6 |
> exactly the right instruction set. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Where did that bit of apocrypha come from, and why is it |
| 9 |
> parroted by so many people? |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> AFAICT, the "performance" benefit due to compiler optimization |
| 12 |
> is practically nil in real-world usage. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I get a bit of a performance boost in some corner cases, like encoding |
| 15 |
videos with x264. But these small stand-alone programs can be compiled |
| 16 |
from source with custom optimization options easily even in binary distros. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
So all in all, I agree. Using Gentoo is nowadays not so much a matter |
| 19 |
of performance optimization but of better control of how to build the |
| 20 |
packages and the rolling release nature (I'm tired of major updates |
| 21 |
every 6 months in the majority of binary distros.) I also like the USE |
| 22 |
flags which let me chose how to build something and get rid of |
| 23 |
dependencies I don't need. Administrative features like dispatch-conf |
| 24 |
are also very useful. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
A downside is that you'll need fast machines to comfortably build |
| 27 |
packages. I wouldn't use it on my Pentium 3 800Mhz for example. That |
| 28 |
would take ages to compile system/world with recent GCC versions. I |
| 29 |
guess GCC was much faster in the 2.x versions back then? |
Archives