[Sussex] Next time the Gentoo argument starts...

[Steve Dobson]

Hi Geoff

On Sat, Aug 02, 2003 at 02:01:23PM +0100, Geoff Teale wrote:
> I think the key point is this - Gentoo _can_ be faster than  a generic 
> build under very specific circumstances.  To get that kind of 
> performance you need to really understand GCC and the impact its various 
> options have on your machine.

It may not be just the GCC options.  What effect did the way the hardware
was driven have an effect?  The article noted that different graphics drivers
were used - how big a factor was that?

One though I had as that it might have been in the instructions used.  Debian
is i386 based.  These instructions in a modern IA32 chip must be very well
optimised by now.  

>                                At the end of the day Linux is Linux.  A 
> lot of Gentoo advocates (myself included) have said a lot about how 
> great it is to have an optomised build and so on, but the most common 
> demand of new Gentoo users is a quick, easy, binary install base.  
> Gentoo 1.4 will make this option available. So I'm inclined to conclude 
> that the people who like Gentoo because they can optomise and control 
> the structure of their machine from the ground up are actually rarer 
> than the people who a: want decent package management but find Debian 
> too behind the times and don't want to touch it's unstable branch; or b: 
> just want to use Gentoo  because it's probably the most fashionable 
> distro out there right now.  I think the later case is because there is 
> some kudos in being able to say you built the OS from the ground up, but 
> lets face it guys, unless your Linus, Ted or Alan or a member of the GCC 
> or glibc dev team you're just kidding yourselves :)

I would agree with you there.  Are geeks into dirto fashion?  It will be
interesting to see how providing a binary option will change Gentoo as it
must.  Which platforms you support and how you go about providing that.

> Increasingly the main reason I choose Gentoo over Debian is that it 
> allows me to use the _current_ release of software and libraries rather 
> than some earlier (but probably more reliable) version.  Especially 
> useful are develop e-builds that link directly into CVS for projects 
> such as Gnome and Enlightenment.  This allows developers (like me) to 
> develop new software, submit it throug CVS and then use emerge to build 
> this into our systems seemlessly.  This really helps with things like 
> Gnome 2.3 (the 2.4 development tree) where some developers are adding 
> new dependencies - when they do they simply add the dependcy to the 
> package and when I emerge it those dependencies get pulled in with the 
> code that requires them.

You highlight here exactly the difference between the two distros.  I've
only been caught once by the version trap that is Debian.  So compiling
one package into /dev/local was not a problem.  Over all Debian as had
less impact on my time, but I can see why you, Geoff, find Gentoo a more
suitable distro for your needs.

I posted the reference to the article because I though it was interesting
and would promote a lively discussion.  As I have already said today I
like the fact that we have choice in the distros we can run.

As a past manager of mine pointed out there are two ways to get more 
performance out of your system.  You can spend 12 months longer in development
hoping that the developers can find 30% more speed.  Or you can move your
developers on to a new project, wait 12 months and release on new hardware
that is twice as fast as the kit that the system was developed on.  I
found it impossible to argue with him and you all know who I like to argue :-)

Steve