From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 490 invoked by uid 1002); 6 Sep 2003 21:56:16 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 7599 invoked from network); 6 Sep 2003 21:56:16 -0000 From: Chris Gianelloni To: camio@yahoo.com Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <200309062021.26817.puggy@bobspants.com> Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="=-/HUtXrZ6aIBXM+V/5o3J" Message-Id: <1062885267.20020.21.camel@vertigo> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.3 Date: 06 Sep 2003 17:54:27 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Some suggestions X-Archives-Salt: f759c053-70df-40f7-963c-a84fb7c9f15a X-Archives-Hash: 2a571059312feb42ffba2da2d3e3cc7b --=-/HUtXrZ6aIBXM+V/5o3J Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, 2003-09-06 at 15:45, David Sankel wrote: > I was afraid that it wouldn't be clear what I meant by this. I am not > suggesting that all files could be automatically overwritten, only files > that were not modified from the default by the user. For example the > file: >=20 > /etc/X11/chooser.sh >=20 > was never changed by a given user on a given system. It is the default f= or > the version they have. When a revision to the default is discovered, the > system will flag that file as being one that the user hasn't specialized.= =20 > In etc-update, there could be an option to update all flagged files > automatically. Does that make more sense? I think this is a great idea. I am tired of having to update files which I haven't even touched simply because they have changed a little since the last merge. > You are absolutely correct. Having something simple like 20/24 (currentl= y > working on package XXX) is probably the best such a progress bar could do= . > If the compilation does break, and that has been very rare in my > experience, the program could output the log of that failed compile for=20 > inspection. I think this feature, being only an option, would be an=20 > enhancement that wouldn't remove any features you are interested in. This is somewhat done now via the xterm titles. I personally find it annoying and turn it off. Having a progress bar for portage would annoy me to no end since as a developer I like to see what is going on with my compiles. If it were implemented as a FEATURE, I would have no problem with it. I also don't think it would be useful at all except in the case of merging multiple ebuilds at once. > I suggest they be left at whatever the non-source based distributions > leave them at. Perhaps I am misinformed about how much improvement one > gets with aggressive optimization flags. Could you point me somewhere in > the right direction? http://www.linuxgazette.com/issue88/piszcz.html Quite simply, test it yourself. The best way to test is to use a x86 GRP CD and install Gentoo. This is approximately equivalent to the build flags on other binary distributions. Run a bunch of benchmarks.=20 Next reinstall the same machine using aggressive CFLAGS and run the same benchmarks. You'll see quite a dramatic difference in many things. The real thing is to realize what could possibly change by optimization.=20 Binary size is usually larger with optimized code, since it is designed for fast execution rather than binary size. For example, a I/O benchmark would be generally worthless to test the speed increases of optimization, since you would be limited much more by the hardware than the code itself. --=20 Chris Gianelloni Developer, Gentoo Linux Games Team Is your power animal a penguin? --=-/HUtXrZ6aIBXM+V/5o3J Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQA/WleTkT4lNIS36YERAgQnAKC2kre6ErG6CKUXAH/QIn8bYz1XgACaA/h8 awxCvHJbY6zXlptVGoDNBGM= =9MYU -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=-/HUtXrZ6aIBXM+V/5o3J--