[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 15 Mar 2007, Danny Pansters wrote:
On Thursday 15 March 2007 02:16, Gary Kline wrote:
Two quick one for kernel and/or compiler wizards: first, is
a 400Mz processor considered a 586 (for my KERNELCONF file)?
Think its 686 (but really, leaving 486 and 586 in isn't going to slow
down
booting or anything!) I always say: Use GENERIC unless you have a
good reason
not to.
Second, is it safe to do a buildworld with -O3? If there are
No. It's not supported if things break.
stability concerns, I'll go with the default when I rebuild my
6.2 systems.
The defaults should be fine. Also, like I said consider just using
GENERIC and
load the odd kmod if needed. Generally it's less headache and equal
performance.
thanks in advance,
gary
Cheers,
Dan
Dan,
I know that this has been discussed a few times before, but IMO
running a slightly stripped down kernel (i.e. custom, not GENERIC)
actually proves to be helpful in increasing boot times (if options
were added statically) and compile times if [(# of options added) < (#
of options in GENERIC)].
I can confirm this too. I noticed on both desktop and servers the boot
time can be decreased by stripping the kernel configuration of stuff you
don't need. I don't have any hard facts to prove this but this is what
my personal experience is.
Jorn
I like being able to compile my kernel on my P4 in less than 10
minutes anyhow with less options :). The only thing that was brought
up earlier (sometime later last year in a thread--I think either Oct
or Nov) is that removing options removes flexibility as well. But
that's a tradeoff you have to make.
-Garrett
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to
"[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"
