On Sun, Oct 06, 2002 at 04:07:21AM -0400, lameth wrote:
> I remember reading that most experienced linux users believe that
> programs run best if you download the source code and compile the code
> on your own machine. Is this true, do programs you compile on your own
> machine run best? Or is it just a matter of knowing the program and your
> computer a little better for having gone through the process of compilation?
Really, this depends. Back in the day when there wasn't too much
software or dependencies, this was a good idea. Especially when the
package you had was compiled for a 386 by the distribution, and you had
a new, whizzo bang Pentium Pro fresh on the market. Now, it's not that
much of a difference. However, I firmly believe in rolling my own
kernel and making it highly modular.
> If a person were to use the .src code for Debian packages and compiles
> them into binaries then installs the packages would you get the same effect?
You could do this, but the hard core recompile junkies will tell you to
install Gentoo or Sorcerer. If I were serious about compiling from
source, those would be the distros I would install, or I would move to
FreeBSD or NetBSD and 'make world' every now and again. Or build a
Linux From Scratch system.
> The reason I ask is because I think I'd really like to doing that. Not
> from the ground up since I finally got debian to work on my computer.
> What I'm thinking of doing is this; After I've used and learned a little
> about linux, replacing the kernel and all the programs I use with ones
> I've compiled from source code myself. That way it would be a gradual
> transition from cdrom based installation to a natively compiled system.
> Is this feasible?
It's feasible, and if you recompile from Debian sources, you can meet
all of the dependencies. There's only one problem though: most
packages are compiled with (reasonably) sane optimizations. There won't
be many performance gains. If I had to recompile four parts of my
system from source, they would be, in this order:
1. glibc, because it is THE library that all programs rely on
2. gcc, because it might speed up compiles
3. kernel, because a correctly tweaked kernel is a thing of beauty
4. XFree86, because I had to include a fourth (X takes FOREVER to
build)
Even then I'm not sure that you'd get many performance gains. Remember
Knuth: "Premature optimization is the root of all evil."
This approach used to be valid back in the days of Slackware 2.0 (which
I fondly remember but am happy in these days), but not because of speed
increases usually, but usually because at the rate software was written,
your distro inevitably never had the updated version of the packages you
wanted, or never had this new software package. Now, it's not so bad.
I find Debian runs fine on my 486 DX2/66, my PII 400, and my P4 1.7 GhZ,
and that's just at home. Don't get me started on my SPARC at work! :-)
Just my 2 red cents,
--
------------------------------------------
Edward Guldemond
Key fingerprint: 29FF 2969 A04E F934 3F03
4329 BC56 3AA7 2F57 6735
Attachment:
pgpbRMc0kzJuU.pgp
Description: PGP signature