Am 15.07.2012 19:31, schrieb Jan Kratochvil: > On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 15:50:39 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote: >> only prelink is good with zero benefit? > > Yes, without that "zero benefit". prelink has provable startup performance > improvement and runtime memory savings. not practically >> i did not notice ever any benfit of prelink even by >> starting large applications > > This is repeating argument again and again, there are many benchmarks of > prelink if you have spent several seconds Googling them, one of them even here: > Re: prelink: is it worth it? > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-July/msg00650.html you must start openoffice damned often that the benfit beats out the overhead of the /etc/cron.daily/prelink >> it is broken by design modify installed/running binaries > > ELF is designed to be relocated, as you can read from the ELF standard. > And prelink is even designed to very easily provide the original binary form. in theory well, but practically? >> it is a solution becuase prelink is a "have solution seacrh for problem" > > The problem is battery drain, everyone tries to optimize battery drain > nowadays, to be "green" and to extend portable devices lifetime. > prelink contributes to the battery drain solution. you must start prelinked applications damend of to beat the battery drain of /etc/cron.daily/prelink > Unless you can claim we should compile everything with -O0 apples and pies the compiler optimizing is made one time on the buildserver for each installation, prelining eats ressources on each installation
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
