On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 15:37:13 +0100 Kevin Chadwick <ma1l1ists@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:58:36 +0200 > Lukáš Jirkovský wrote: > > > (especially on 32bit). > > > Slightly on 32bit and almost no difference on 64bit. OpenBSD uses PIEs > everywhere and my x86 users say everythings much quicker than Windows. > > Fair enough though as long as you do have a good understanding of the > real difference to users. I'm quite happy, it would just be better all > round. > > Phones have very litle resources and despite the bull that many believe, > an x86 cycle is not even close to an arm cycle and yet Android now > uses PIE for better ASLR. Please don't bring up geekbench or coremark > as that's a crock for cross architecture if you look at the stated > caveats by coremark or details and results by geekbench. Your better of > measuring in time to accomplish something. > > I read in a forum which was completely unsubstantiated that Google > avoided PIE for chrome due to javascript speed. Chromium runs just fine > on OpenBSD also. > > Alpine uses ulibc for size and speed and still PIE. +1 for all arches. However, some programs will fail to build straightforwadly, e.g. evince, cpupower, claws-mail. -- Leonid Isaev GnuPG key: 0x164B5A6D Fingerprint: C0DF 20D0 C075 C3F1 E1BE 775A A7AE F6CB 164B 5A6D
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
