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 1S0eoG-0007Kw-Os for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:58:37 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 47B03E0E50; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:58:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8619EE0DBB for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:55:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D20DD1B4010 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:55:29 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.884 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.884 tagged_above=-999 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.026, BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, FSL_RCVD_USER=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.01] autolearn=no Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id o8rVGUgCptEa for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:55:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from plane.gmane.org (plane.gmane.org [80.91.229.3]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A1D1B1B4015 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 19:55:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S0el4-0005Hz-Lm for gentoo-user@gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:55:18 +0100 Received: from athedsl-343073.home.otenet.gr ([85.72.195.191]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:55:18 +0100 Received: from realnc by athedsl-343073.home.otenet.gr with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 23 Feb 2012 20:55:18 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org From: Nikos Chantziaras Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Firefox-10.0.1 fails to compile on x86 Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2012 21:55:07 +0200 Organization: Lucas Barks Message-ID: References: <20120222002227.GA3081@ca.inter.net> <20120223102240.GB6656@Gee-Mi-Ni.epfl.ch> <201202231044.51216.michaelkintzios@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=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: athedsl-343073.home.otenet.gr User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.1) Gecko/20120213 Thunderbird/10.0.1 In-Reply-To: X-Archives-Salt: a5678ca7-d9df-4927-bf67-6fde1e7b10c7 X-Archives-Hash: bdb19be167b5b70b456c23fe8b08ca5f On 23/02/12 21:42, Michael Mol wrote: > On Thu, Feb 23, 2012 at 2:36 PM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: >> On 23/02/12 12:44, Mick wrote: >>> The irony is that older boxen which would benefit most from building from >>> source are constrained in resources to achieve this and have to resort to >>> installing bin packages. >> >> I doubt that the bin package will be slower than the one compiled from >> source. I predict the reverse, in fact. The bin package will perform >> better. > > That seems a strange prediction. What drives that hunch? The PGO optimized build that Mozilla is shipping. You can also build with PGO from source, but that means building FF *twice* in a row (by enabling the "pgo" USE flag). I doubt that with the old laptop anyone is building FF twice with PGO, and that means that the -bin package should be faster. Furthermore, FF is build using its own CFLAGS. They are the same in the source build as well as in the -bin package. The only difference is probably the -march option. And that doesn't make much difference to begin with (after -march=i686, gains are very minimal).