• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Gentoo question...

H

Hyperblaze

Lifer
I am in the process of doing an installation of gentoo on my box

One thing which caused me some suspicion is whenever I looked at /etc/make.conf

I noticed a line which had host="i386-blahblahblah"

My box is a p3-450.

Should that line be changed to i686 or left at i386? Anyone know?

If you need more description, I'll have to wait till my gentoo install is done.
 
i386 binaries will work on any 386s or above x86 processor. i386 specifications(?) probably get the most testing in gcc, so I'd be a bit leary setting it to anything else. Also, the benefits of setting it to anything else for most binaries is close to nil.
 
Originally posted by: Jero
Leaving it alone =)

Will be recompiling the kernel for i686 though! 😉
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much this affects the kernel, but I'd be looking more towards crypto stuff. OpenSSL can get a noticable improvement with decent optimizations/targets.
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Jero
Leaving it alone =)

Will be recompiling the kernel for i686 though! 😉
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much this affects the kernel, but I'd be looking more towards crypto stuff. OpenSSL can get a noticable improvement with decent optimizations/targets.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand you....

first you say that leaving it to i386 wouldn't make that much of a difference...

and now you are saying it will?

😕
 
Originally posted by: Jero
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Jero
Leaving it alone =)

Will be recompiling the kernel for i686 though! 😉
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much this affects the kernel, but I'd be looking more towards crypto stuff. OpenSSL can get a noticable improvement with decent optimizations/targets.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand you....

first you say that leaving it to i386 wouldn't make that much of a difference...

and now you are saying it will?

😕
Click to expand...

I've highlighted the word in my original post (quoted below for convenience) that is the most important for this situation:

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
i386 binaries will work on any 386s or above x86 processor. i386 specifications(?) probably get the most testing in gcc, so I'd be a bit leary setting it to anything else. Also, the benefits of setting it to anything else for most binaries is close to nil.
Click to expand...

😉

EDIT: To further quality this, many cryptography related programs can benefit from the extra instructions in more modern processors. Other large programs (I think mysql is an example) can benefit to varying degrees, but I can't remember how much (benchmarks were on an ultrasparc 5 anyhow, so it might not matter as much on ix86 systems).
 
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Jero
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Jero
Leaving it alone =)

Will be recompiling the kernel for i686 though! 😉
Click to expand...

I'm not sure how much this affects the kernel, but I'd be looking more towards crypto stuff. OpenSSL can get a noticable improvement with decent optimizations/targets.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure I understand you....

first you say that leaving it to i386 wouldn't make that much of a difference...

and now you are saying it will?

😕
Click to expand...

I've highlighted the word in my original post (quoted below for convenience) that is the most important for this situation:

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
i386 binaries will work on any 386s or above x86 processor. i386 specifications(?) probably get the most testing in gcc, so I'd be a bit leary setting it to anything else. Also, the benefits of setting it to anything else for most binaries is close to nil.
Click to expand...

😉

EDIT: To further quality this, many cryptography related programs can benefit from the extra instructions in more modern processors. Other large programs (I think mysql is an example) can benefit to varying degrees, but I can't remember how much (benchmarks were on an ultrasparc 5 anyhow, so it might not matter as much on ix86 systems).
Click to expand...

/me smacks self....

I tell ya, ass-u-me ing things just gets you in trouble 😉
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
which is why you only compile everything ONCE.
Click to expand...

So you never plan on updating your system?
Click to expand...

let me stress the word 'everything'

Of course you update your system on a regular basis...

but you only need to compile 'everything' once

then you compile things as need be.
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
Compiling everything all the time (i.e. Gentoo) is a waste of time...
Click to expand...

I don't mind so much. I can have my OpenBSD systems recompiling everything while still working on other stuff. I used to do it all the time.

Of course, I try to use binary snapshots now because I'm lazy. 😎
 
let me stress the word 'everything'

Of course you update your system on a regular basis...

but you only need to compile 'everything' once

then you compile things as need be.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make it any less pointless.
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
let me stress the word 'everything'

Of course you update your system on a regular basis...

but you only need to compile 'everything' once

then you compile things as need be.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make it any less pointless.
Click to expand...

Somebody's gotta do it. 😉
 
Originally posted by: Nothinman
let me stress the word 'everything'

Of course you update your system on a regular basis...

but you only need to compile 'everything' once

then you compile things as need be.
Click to expand...

That doesn't make it any less pointless.
Click to expand...

And building a pc of your own is pointless when you can just go to the store and buy a compaq...

A dog licking it's own balls is pointless, but he does it cause he can.
 
Just set it to i686.
I ran Gentoo with that config for some time, never ran into any problems, I'd say i686 is more than mature enough to be a target for your avarge workstation these days.

As for the reasons to run Gentoo, if you only want it for speed(or rather, the perceived speed gain) it's pointless.
Gentoo does come with other nice things though, if you want those, it's a good distro.
 
Somebody's gotta do it.
Click to expand...

Yes, auto-builders. Having every user build the same package for no reason is a waste of time.

And building a pc of your own is pointless when you can just go to the store and buy a compaq...
Click to expand...

To start out maybe, but after that it's much cheaper to just buy replacement parts when you need to. And it's not really comparable, building packages from source gets you nearly (I would say within 99%) the same package that you would get from a binary one, buildilng your own PC can get you a radically different box compared to what HP or Dell offer.

A dog licking it's own balls is pointless, but he does it cause he can.
Click to expand...

He does it because he doesn't shower, not because they taste good.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top