> Doesn't building on CentOS 5 also mean using a quite old version of gcc?
I have had pretty good luck using the (awesomely named) Holy Build Box <http://phusion.github.io/holy-build-box/>, which is a CentOS 5 docker image with a newer gcc version installed (but I guess the same old libc). I'm not 100% sure how it works, but it's quite nice. For example, you can use c++11 and still keep all the binary compatibility benefits of CentOS 5. -Robert On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:38 PM, Nathaniel Smith <n...@pobox.com> wrote: > On Fri, Jan 8, 2016 at 7:17 PM, Nathan Goldbaum <nathan12...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > Doesn't building on CentOS 5 also mean using a quite old version of gcc? > > Yes. IIRC CentOS 5 ships with gcc 4.4, and you can bump that up to gcc > 4.8 by using the Redhat Developer Toolset release (which is gcc + > special backport libraries to let it generate RHEL5/CentOS5-compatible > binaries). (I might have one or both of those version numbers slightly > wrong.) > > > I've never tested this, but I've seen claims on the anaconda mailing > list of > > ~25% slowdowns compared to building from source or using system packages, > > which was attributed to building using an older gcc that doesn't > optimize as > > well as newer versions. > > I'd be very surprised if that were a 25% slowdown in general, as > opposed to a 25% slowdown on some particular inner loop that happened > to neatly match some new feature in a new gcc (e.g. something where > the new autovectorizer kicked in). But yeah, in general this is just > an inevitable trade-off when it comes to distributing binaries: you're > always going to pay some penalty for achieving broad compatibility as > compared to artisanally hand-tuned binaries specialized for your > machine's exact OS version, processor, etc. Not much to be done, > really. At some point the baseline for compatibility will switch to > "compile everything on CentOS 6", and that will be better but it will > still be worse than binaries that target CentOS 7, and so on and so > forth. > > -n > > -- > Nathaniel J. Smith -- http://vorpus.org > _______________________________________________ > NumPy-Discussion mailing list > NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org > https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion >
_______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list NumPy-Discussion@scipy.org https://mail.scipy.org/mailman/listinfo/numpy-discussion