Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 24
i have 2 computers, one with a 1.6GHz cpu and 256MB of ram running ubuntu 10.04, the other has a 2.4GHz cpu and 128MB of ram running DSL. my question ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    46

    compile times


    i have 2 computers, one with a 1.6GHz cpu and 256MB of ram running ubuntu 10.04, the other has a 2.4GHz cpu and 128MB of ram running DSL. my question is which one would compile the linux kernel (2.6) the quickest?

  2. #2
    Linux Guru coopstah13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    NH, USA
    Posts
    3,149
    if the processors are the same, except for the clock speed, i would think the 2.4 ghz would be faster

    i don't think memory will be an issue

  3. #3
    Linux Guru Rubberman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    I can be found either 40 miles west of Chicago, in Chicago, or in a galaxy far, far away.
    Posts
    11,406
    Actually, memory is very much likely to be an issue here if you are compiling anything but the most trivial program. In any case, the only way to tell is to do some timing tests - timing the build of the same set of code on both systems running the same mix of software and same compiler versions. That will give a baseline measurment, however if other applications may be run at various times while the compilation is going on, you might want to simulate that as well.
    Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real time.
    Just remember, Semper Gumbi - always be flexible!

  4. #4
    Linux Guru rokytnji's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Desert
    Posts
    3,997
    Duh, Being a Biker. Wouldn't the Ubuntu Box running Gnome gob up more ram than DSL running Fluxbox? Seems to me, That if he has all the tools to compile in DSL. DSL would be faster than Ubuntu (with all it's background stuff running)
    Linux Registered User # 475019
    Lead,Follow, or get the heck out of the way. I Have a Masters in Raising Hell
    Tech Books
    Free Linux Books
    Newbie Guide
    Courses at Home

  5. #5
    Linux Guru Rubberman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    I can be found either 40 miles west of Chicago, in Chicago, or in a galaxy far, far away.
    Posts
    11,406
    Well Roky, it's possible that Ubuntu is running without a GUI, etc. Hence my comment about running the systems with similar load factors.
    Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real time.
    Just remember, Semper Gumbi - always be flexible!

  6. #6
    Linux Guru rokytnji's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Desert
    Posts
    3,997
    Quote Originally Posted by Rubberman View Post
    Well Roky, it's possible that Ubuntu is running without a GUI, etc. Hence my comment about running the systems with similar load factors.

    Alrighty then. Thats why I was asking.
    Linux Registered User # 475019
    Lead,Follow, or get the heck out of the way. I Have a Masters in Raising Hell
    Tech Books
    Free Linux Books
    Newbie Guide
    Courses at Home

  7. #7
    Linux Guru Rubberman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    I can be found either 40 miles west of Chicago, in Chicago, or in a galaxy far, far away.
    Posts
    11,406
    Well Roky, you did make a good point! In fact, my myopic eyeballs missed the itty bitty detail about Ubuntu 10.04 vs DSL...
    Sometimes, real fast is almost as good as real time.
    Just remember, Semper Gumbi - always be flexible!

  8. #8
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    46
    Actually, memory is very much likely to be an issue here if you are compiling anything but the most trivial program. In any case, the only way to tell is to do some timing tests - timing the build of the same set of code on both systems running the same mix of software and same compiler versions. That will give a baseline measurment, however if other applications may be run at various times while the compilation is going on, you might want to simulate that as well.
    yeah that would probably be the best way but what code should i to use?
    if the processors are the same, except for the clock speed, i would think the 2.4 ghz would be faster
    there both Celerons.
    Well Roky, it's possible that Ubuntu is running without a GUI, etc. Hence my comment about running the systems with similar load factors.
    so would using Fluxbox with ubuntu make it more even than using the command line or Gnome?

  9. #9
    Linux Guru rokytnji's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Desert
    Posts
    3,997
    so would using Fluxbox with ubuntu make it more even
    No. You will be running Ubuntu in a X enviorment still, even though Fluxbox is lighter than Gnome.
    DSL just runs Lighter than Ubuntu. Nature of the beast.


    than using the command line
    If compiling a kernel in Ubuntu with 256mb of ram. There has been no mention of swap partition size also. Booting into single user mode would be the lightest way to compile in Ubuntu.

    But Hey, I am just a Linux using Motorcycle Shop Owner. Take what I say with a grain of salt. Better coders than me know more about this than I.
    Linux Registered User # 475019
    Lead,Follow, or get the heck out of the way. I Have a Masters in Raising Hell
    Tech Books
    Free Linux Books
    Newbie Guide
    Courses at Home

  10. #10
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    6
    ofcourse the latter one

Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •