From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1M66O2-0002EX-JG for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 18 May 2009 17:12:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2EA8EE047B; Mon, 18 May 2009 17:12:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com (cdptpa-omtalb.mail.rr.com [75.180.132.122]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 14E0EE047B for ; Mon, 18 May 2009 17:12:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from linux1.localdomain ([66.25.35.110]) by cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com with ESMTP id <20090518171223656.QNQE748@cdptpa-omta03.mail.rr.com> for ; Mon, 18 May 2009 17:12:23 +0000 Received: by linux1.localdomain (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6BDEE43C03; Mon, 18 May 2009 12:12:22 -0500 (CDT) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 12:12:22 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel Message-ID: <20090518171222.GA28590@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org References: <4A09312E.9010007@gmail.com> <4A10314D.8000406@gmail.com> <20090517161814.GB4724@ca.inter.net> <20090517183249.7db361f5@krikkit.digimed.co.uk> <20090518112900.GB4740@ca.inter.net> <20090518125748.224c7d1f@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> <20090518140651.GD4740@ca.inter.net> <4A11881F.7010404@gmail.com> <20090518162838.GE4740@ca.inter.net> <4A11900E.7040800@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-action=pgp-signed Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4A11900E.7040800@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.16 (2007-06-09) X-Archives-Salt: d538d3d2-764b-400f-843e-2bdd83875871 X-Archives-Hash: bc5e96a6dac2b2dadec35f53e16a1d72 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 05:42:54PM +0100, bn wrote: > So, I would really want to understand where the Gentoo flexibility beats > down a binary distro. > > Don't get me wrong -I like Gentoo. Really. But the claim that a binary > distro is "unfixable" just because I had someone compiling it for me > instead of having emerge doing the job, looks odd to me. For me, one big difference is in our use flags. Binary distros have to force you to install packages with all of their dependencies, but that is not required on gentoo since you can select which features you want to support. Another difference is that, since you are compiling everything from source, with the correct CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS settings in make.conf, you can optimize the binaries you produce to take full advantage of your processor, which you can't do on a binary distro since everything is already compiled for you. - -- William Hubbs gentoo accessibility team lead williamh@gentoo.org -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkoRlvYACgkQblQW9DDEZThkyQCfc7F/1/rGuhVFq2xxtb57fmc7 AT4AnRQSLghiBHkREKly3le7rGN8fYsA =z+CH -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----