On Wed, Feb 04, 2009 at 08:45:50AM -0430, Sebastián Magrí wrote: [snip] > > > > Often on gentoo related IRC chanels comes someone who asks why his > > firefox-bin (or openoffice-bin or *-bin) runs faster than his > > built-from-source firefox. > > > > Usually chan's gurus answer that upstream packagers use all the possible > > compiler optimizations (CFLAGS LDFLAGS etc.) for the given package, > > while the average gentoo users keeps a set of "system wide very safe > > optimizations" that are good for most packages, but not the best for > > every particolar package. > > > > Is that statement correct? > > > > ======= > > TopperH > > ======= > > I've always felt the compiled openoffice faster than the binary one, but > if it is not the case portage also gives you the chance of establishing > per-package optimisations on '/etc/portage/env/' or in the paludis > bashrc, so if one user wants an particular app to go faster, he can > research about the best way to build this one. This way, the user can > keep the very safe optimisations for the rest of the system and some > -unsafe optimisations- for the packages he want. > > It is more about choices...
Sure, I've used per-package optimizations myself in some particular cases, but that's not the point. A package manteiner *should* know better than an average user which optimizations will tune better their own package. My question can be put like this: Do binary distro's per package optimiziations override the benefit of having arch specific optimiziations that gentoo allows? ======= TopperH =======
pgp5Jqrnm0iHU.pgp
Description: PGP signature
