🚀 go-pugleaf

Ray <nmos@sonictech.net> wrote:
>On 5 Jan 2003 21:25:56 -0800, warr <warren22432@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Matt van de Werken <m_vdw73@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message news:<pan.2003.01.05.05.14.18.890697.1189@optusnet.com.au>...
>> 
>>> 
>>> Even then, not necessarily. Try make -j 2 to compile your kernel. I get a
>>> clean kernel compile time of less than 5 minutes for my system (dual Athlon
>>> MP1800+, 512MB DDR RAM).
>> 
>>> 
>>> Cheers,
>>> MvdW
>> 
>> i didn't use -j2 option and compile the 2.4.20 kernel on my single
>> Athlon 1600+. hte compilation completes within 5 minutes.
>> 
>> I also have 512DDR ram.
>
>Comparing kernel compile times on two different systems is worthless unless
>you both have exactly the same options selected.

But, but, but...  it works just like any other benchmark!

I use a totally stripped down kernel that includes elf and ext2,
while everything else is a module.  Plus I show times for "make
bzImage".  The other guy, who ever he may be, has a kernel
loaded with options that could be modules and shows the time for
"make depend bzImage modules".

That is clearly at least as valid as any benchmark Intel or AMD
has ever shown us!  At least I haven't diddled with the compiler,
though I may have modified the "time" program slightly...

Of course, there is Dennis Ritchie,  who was seen to admit leaving
some feature out of his Plan 9 kernel because it caused the compile
time to exceed 30 seconds.

-- 
Floyd L. Davidson         <http://www.ptialaska.net/~floyd>
Ukpeagvik (Barrow, Alaska)                 floyd@barrow.com