LFS for Old Hardware, which to choose?

Matthew Burgess matthew at linuxfromscratch.org
Sat Mar 12 13:26:31 PST 2005

Tor Olav Stava wrote:
> My question is basically, which LFS version to choose? I've been looking at
> 6.0 and 5.1.1, but they seem to be quite slow on these archaic machines.
> Would I be better off going back to LFS-4.x or even 3.x?

Hmm, I'd well imagine that it would take much longer to *build* recent 
versions of LFS, but I'm surprised that runtime is significantly 
affected.  LFS is a fairly minimal system, so I'm wondering exactly 
where the slowdown is.  Are we talking bootup time, or runtime of 
specific programs?  I'm lead to believe that gcc has made some headway 
in producing faster running executables in the more recent versions 
you'll find in LFS-{6.0,5.1.1}.

Care to enlighten us as to specifically where the slowdown is?



More information about the lfs-chat mailing list