4 ms·

More purity fight even before that. Remember, when pre-compiled kernels started to get popular, it was seen as bad thing, as everyone was supposed to compile th

More purity fight even before that. Remember, when pre-compiled kernels started to get popular, it was seen as bad thing, as everyone was supposed to compile their own kernel which took into consideration of their hardware configuration for optimization.

sgbeal 3y ago
Ah, self-compiled kernels at least once a week. Those were the days... which i would not want to return to.
- lo_zamoyski 3y ago
  The Gentoo way. The tradition lives on...somewhere...
  - djbusby 3y ago
    Gentoo has binary kernel (if you want it) - and of course other options for source, vanilla, etc.
    - pxc 3y ago
      NixOS and GuixSD, much younger distributions in the same broad source-based package management tradition as Gentoo, also make custom kernels super easy to integrate with their usual package management systems while providing convenient, pre-built options. I'm fine with generic kernel builds and that's what I usually use, but I don't think tweaking your kernel is as painful or manual today as the greybeards here remember.
      - cesarb 3y ago
        > I'm fine with generic kernel builds and that's what I usually use, but I don't think tweaking your kernel is as painful or manual today as the greybeards here remember. Back then, we went into "make menuconfig", and meticulously reviewed every single configuration option, carefully tuning them to our bespoke hardware; it only took a few hours. Try doing that nowadays; there's simply way too many configuration options (each new device driver adds a couple, and even the kernel core has grown to hundreds of them). So yeah, I'd say fully tweaking your kernel is a more painful process today than in the past. (The same for packages; back then, we could open "dselect" and page through all the available packages in a single evening; nowadays, there's too many of them.)
        pxc 3y ago
        When I was in high school, I used to use `make menuconfig` that way. I guess I hadn't thought about extending that comprehensive review process to contemporary kernels. I imagine that most people compiling their own kernels today are doing it for the sake of specific, targeted tweaks that they are aware they want in advance.
    - inglor_cz 3y ago
      How much extra performance would you squeeze out on a normal consumer laptop by compiling the kernel yourself nowadays? One per cent? Even back in the Gentoo days, when we measured the differences, they were underwhelming.
      - djbusby 3y ago
        Wasn't the kernel so much as compiling all the other stuff with GCC picking the right arch/optimisation. Cause those were for sure faster than running the stock i386 or i686 or x64 apps. But it's been so long (2005) I don't have the numbers in front of me anymore. Not as critical in 2023.
  - dagmx 3y ago
    Doesn’t Gentoo handle the compilation for you though? From the end user perspective, it’s effectively just a really long install process.
    - seba_dos1 3y ago
      That's what compilation itself usually is though? You don't go and call cc manually for every single compilation unit youself, you just run something like "make" and wait.
      - dagmx 3y ago
        True, but I guess I meant more that people who are installing Gentoo aren’t necessarily cognizant of what is being compiled. They’re not following each dependency, building it, then testing it, debugging etc… That’s not a judgement on them. I wouldn’t want to do that either. I just meant to say that they “feel” different to me, even if the end result is the same.
        zerocrates 3y ago
        The kernel is much more likely to be "actually" built from source by Gentoo users (in the sense of going and doing things with "make" in the kernel source directory) than any other package. There are automatic options available for the kernel but the "just get the sources and handle the rest yourself" option is, I'm sure, more popular for the kernel than anything else.

sgbeal 3y ago

Ah, self-compiled kernels at least once a week. Those were the days... which i would not want to return to.

lo_zamoyski 3y ago
The Gentoo way. The tradition lives on...somewhere...
- djbusby 3y ago
  Gentoo has binary kernel (if you want it) - and of course other options for source, vanilla, etc.
  - pxc 3y ago
    NixOS and GuixSD, much younger distributions in the same broad source-based package management tradition as Gentoo, also make custom kernels super easy to integrate with their usual package management systems while providing convenient, pre-built options. I'm fine with generic kernel builds and that's what I usually use, but I don't think tweaking your kernel is as painful or manual today as the greybeards here remember.
    - cesarb 3y ago
      > I'm fine with generic kernel builds and that's what I usually use, but I don't think tweaking your kernel is as painful or manual today as the greybeards here remember. Back then, we went into "make menuconfig", and meticulously reviewed every single configuration option, carefully tuning them to our bespoke hardware; it only took a few hours. Try doing that nowadays; there's simply way too many configuration options (each new device driver adds a couple, and even the kernel core has grown to hundreds of them). So yeah, I'd say fully tweaking your kernel is a more painful process today than in the past. (The same for packages; back then, we could open "dselect" and page through all the available packages in a single evening; nowadays, there's too many of them.)
      - pxc 3y ago
        When I was in high school, I used to use `make menuconfig` that way. I guess I hadn't thought about extending that comprehensive review process to contemporary kernels. I imagine that most people compiling their own kernels today are doing it for the sake of specific, targeted tweaks that they are aware they want in advance.
  - inglor_cz 3y ago
    How much extra performance would you squeeze out on a normal consumer laptop by compiling the kernel yourself nowadays? One per cent? Even back in the Gentoo days, when we measured the differences, they were underwhelming.
    - djbusby 3y ago
      Wasn't the kernel so much as compiling all the other stuff with GCC picking the right arch/optimisation. Cause those were for sure faster than running the stock i386 or i686 or x64 apps. But it's been so long (2005) I don't have the numbers in front of me anymore. Not as critical in 2023.
- dagmx 3y ago
  Doesn’t Gentoo handle the compilation for you though? From the end user perspective, it’s effectively just a really long install process.
  - seba_dos1 3y ago
    That's what compilation itself usually is though? You don't go and call cc manually for every single compilation unit youself, you just run something like "make" and wait.
    - dagmx 3y ago
      True, but I guess I meant more that people who are installing Gentoo aren’t necessarily cognizant of what is being compiled. They’re not following each dependency, building it, then testing it, debugging etc… That’s not a judgement on them. I wouldn’t want to do that either. I just meant to say that they “feel” different to me, even if the end result is the same.
      - zerocrates 3y ago
        The kernel is much more likely to be "actually" built from source by Gentoo users (in the sense of going and doing things with "make" in the kernel source directory) than any other package. There are automatic options available for the kernel but the "just get the sources and handle the rest yourself" option is, I'm sure, more popular for the kernel than anything else.