Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Vince Mulhollon
On 09/04/2002 08:12:50 AM Christoph Martin wrote: etc. This has the benefit that it works on every i386 compatible processor but it is slow on processors where there could be a lot of optimisation. Oh not this thread again! Processor specific optimizations for i386 is debated approx every 2

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Vince Mulhollon
On 09/04/2002 08:26:19 AM Vince Mulhollon wrote: I think I can safely speak for everyone on debian-devel as per this: 1) The difference in overall speed is small, and rarely publically reported. The 1% gain is individually considered either vital must-have, or worthless. 2) The archive

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
Christoph Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: The idea is to have a standard libssl0.9.6 package with no optimisation and some optional packages like libssl0.9.6-i686 or libssl0.9.6-k7 which can replace libssl0.9.6. The shared library is 179 kB. Why don't you just provide the optimized

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Colin Watson
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 08:26:19AM -0500, Vince Mulhollon wrote: On 09/04/2002 08:12:50 AM Christoph Martin wrote: etc. This has the benefit that it works on every i386 compatible processor but it is slow on processors where there could be a lot of optimisation. Oh not this thread again!

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
Vince Mulhollon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think I can safely speak for everyone on debian-devel as per this: 1) The difference in overall speed is small, and rarely publically reported. The 1% gain is individually considered either vital must-have, or worthless. You have obviously never

Re [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread chris
Vince Mulhollon [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: I think I can safely speak for everyone on debian-devel as per this: 1) The difference in overall speed is small, and rarely publically reported. The 1% gain is individually considered either vital must-have, or worthless. You have obviously

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Michael Stone
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 08:26:19AM -0500, Vince Mulhollon wrote: I think I can safely speak for everyone on debian-devel as per this: 1) The difference in overall speed is small, and rarely publically reported. The 1% gain is individually considered either vital must-have, or worthless.

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Vince Mulhollon
On 09/04/2002 08:51:02 AM [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker) wrote: division and multiplication. Recompiling libssl with SPARCv8 optimizations speeds up logging in with ssh on an Ultra1 (SPARCv9) by a factor of 6, IIRC. See the debian-sparc archives for details. This is quite

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Michael Stone
On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 03:35:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: The shared library is 179 kB. Why don't you just provide the optimized versions in the same package? Are the any stability/correctness issues Now for the real overachiever, what would be really cool is if you hacked

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Marcelo E. Magallon
Michael Stone [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: Now for the real overachiever, what would be really cool is if you hacked openssl to do *runtime* detection of which optimizations to use. That would be indeed much better. I blindly assumed he was talking about compiler flags and I further

Re: [RFD] optimized versions of openssl

2002-09-04 Thread Michael Poole
Michael Stone writes: On Wed, Sep 04, 2002 at 03:35:58PM +0200, Marcelo E. Magallon wrote: The shared library is 179 kB. Why don't you just provide the optimized versions in the same package? Are the any stability/correctness issues Now for the real overachiever, what would be really