| 1 |
Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wednesday 21 July 2010 17:49:46 Bill Longman wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> And to play devil's advocate, I'll chime in with my experience. The 4.4 |
| 5 |
>> GCC, at least on AMD CPUs, creates noticeably faster code. I recompiled |
| 6 |
>> all my packages after I upgraded to 4.4 and it was a noticeable |
| 7 |
>> difference. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> But, to make perfectly clear what Alan and Dale have stated previously, |
| 10 |
>> it is not a requirement to recompile anything. The binaries that are |
| 11 |
>> created still call the same system calls as they did before. The kernel |
| 12 |
>> still publishes them in the same locations. And to prove to yourself |
| 13 |
>> this is true, grab a statically linked binary, compiled for a stock |
| 14 |
>> standard i686, and run it on your machine. |
| 15 |
>> |
| 16 |
> I'd love to be able to experience the speedups of gcc-4.4 and by rights I |
| 17 |
> should be able to - my last "rip gentoo apart and put it back together again" |
| 18 |
> stunt needed an emerge -e world to fix it all. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> But, and this is the bit that makes me cry, the slowdown from KDE-4.4.5 has |
| 21 |
> obliterated all that advantage several times over..... |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> raster *really* needs to hurrry up now and release e17 |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
My last KDE upgrade made KDE a little faster here as well. It won't be |
| 28 |
as fast as e17 tho. Since I upgraded gcc a little before that, I wasn't |
| 29 |
sure if it was gcc building better code or KDE got rid of some garbage. |
| 30 |
It is a little faster tho. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
I suspect gcc. When as larger programs ever got faster? I'm sure they |
| 33 |
added code to KDE, not taking code away. ;-) |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Dale |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
:-) :-) |
Archives