News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:What I think what we need to do to keep FreeBSD relevant ... by trasz on Sunday January 12, 2020 @09:07AM (#22026323)
There's a number of fundamental problems with Phoronix benchmarks; one of them is building software in a wrong way (using vanilla sources, without neccessary patches), and often simply measuring compiler and not the operating system itself.
Re:What I think what we need to do to keep FreeBSD relevant ... by LargoLasskhyfv on Sunday January 12, 2020 @07:20PM (#22030793)
"Das Balkenspiel ist schlechter Stil."

"The bargraph game is lame."

edit: To expand on this, there is/was one person who tried to tackle this in a meaningful way.

[1] https://web.archive.org/web/20070607182125/http://www.coyote...

The bitrotten remains of this can be found here: [2] https://github.com/Acovea/libacovea

I'm aware of academic research regarding HPC and superoptimizing, but no one has applied that to generalized distro testing, so far. (At least not in public.)

I think this should be a hook in some reproducible build system.

But everyboody seems to have caved in against the complexity explosion this would involve. And build times.

OpenOffice, Firefox, Chrome, KDE, Gnome....the HORROR!

Re:What I think what we need to do to keep FreeBSD relevant ... by csdreamer7 on Sunday January 12, 2020 @02:15PM (#22028471)
> using vanilla sources, without neccessary patches

Why is that a problem? From a 3rd benchmark point of view testing the official tarball is the most relevant point to test for a Linux using audience. Different distros has different patches. Some don't even patch the software.

Re:What I think what we need to do to keep FreeBSD relevant ... by trasz on Sunday January 12, 2020 @03:55PM (#22029256)
Because upstream often uses defaults that are fine for Linux, but not necessarily anything else. That’s why one should use official ports/packages, instead of hacking things together like its ‘90s.