GCC 3 or 4?

Roger Merchberger zmerch-lfs at 30below.com
Tue Feb 13 21:37:44 PST 2007


Rumor has it that Dan Nicholson may have mentioned these words:
>On 2/13/07, Roger Merchberger <zmerch-lfs at 30below.com> wrote:
> >
> > It would be interesting to see the difference in compile times/binary sizes
> > between GCC 3 & 4 for... say... an LFS build. ;-)
>
>Sounds like you're volunteering :)

Heck, I'm still trying to figure out jhalfs... haven't figured out how to 
get that working as of yet, but every time I've tried, the machine in 
question either 1) had no 'net connection, or 2) had something wonky with 
the ethernet connection.[1]

I've been wanting to build a new LFS system for my laptop, but the rascal's 
a touch too slow to dedicate right now for compiling on it's own[2], so I'd 
like to setup distcc and use my nice dual-core Athlon to help out with 
it... but alas, there's this thing called "work" that gets in the way... ;-)

I'll keep tinkering with it, tho, and if I can get a good compile 
workstation set up, I'll give 'er a go.

Laterz,
Roger "Merch" Merchberger

[1] VMWare 5.5 Workstation on WinXP; the ethernet NATing services are _odd_...

[2] Among other things, I use my laptop as a portable audio recording 
system w/Audacity under Winders (for some reason, I was getting audio 
ghosties under Linux :-/), so switching to/from a LFS compile right now 
would be problematic; unless I could complete the compile in under 8 hours, 
which it can't do on it's own - it's just a poor ol' Crusoe 933; not 
perzactly a speed demon... ;-)

--
Roger "Merch" Merchberger   | "Profile, don't speculate."
SysAdmin, Iceberg Computers |     Daniel J. Bernstein
zmerch at 30below.com          |




More information about the lfs-support mailing list