Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 910111213 LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 122

Thread: OpenBSD 5.1 Released

  1. #101

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    Is it possible to overcommit physical memory (RAM + swap) without overcommiting free memory (RAM + swap)?
    This seems to be possible in modes 0 and 1, but you have to define exactly what you understand by this.

    If you are fully POSIX compliant, you can also "overcommit" POSIX limit. POSIX doesn't prohibits non-POSIX functions.
    It doesn't matter, because you can be smarter than POSIX and rather trying to be fully POSIX compliant you can do some things better on your own.

  2. #102

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    I was talking about glibc (because it is being used by most of distributions). I know there are alternatives.
    Debian and Ubuntu probably use eglibc which seems to be much less bloated.

  3. #103
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Debian and Ubuntu probably use eglibc which seems to be much less bloated.
    Size of library is the same. So it just seems.

  4. #104
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    This seems to be possible in modes 0 and 1, but you have to define exactly what you understand by this.
    I mean It's not logical, but forget about it.


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    It doesn't matter, because you can be smarter than POSIX and rather trying to be fully POSIX compliant you can do some things better on your own.
    This is what Microsoft did.
    If everyone would speak it's own language, so they wouldn't understand each other, they would be smarter?

  5. #105

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    Size of library is the same. So it just seems.
    The size of the library is just one part. There are also other possibilities like header files in ELF library or GCC optimizations. You probably didn't check with the same GCC version.

    http://www.techpulp.com/blog/tag/tri...ux-elf-binary/

  6. #106

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    I mean It's not logical, but forget about it.
    I meant it's logical when the mode 2 is set.

    This is what Microsoft did.
    If everyone would speak it's own language, so they wouldn't understand each other, they would be smarter?
    Yes and thanks to this MS was very strong in many areas. The difference is there are people who care about being compatible with others and there are people who don't. I support interoperability in things like web, but I don't care when comes to other things. Those who are stronger dictate rules.

  7. #107
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    The size of the library is just one part. There are also other possibilities like header files in ELF library or GCC optimizations. You probably didn't check with the same GCC version.

    http://www.techpulp.com/blog/tag/tri...ux-elf-binary/
    As I said everything was "strip -s". Optimisations are -O2 on Arch Linux and I think it's the same on Ubuntu where I checked eglibc. Arch Linux has a bit newer GCC. Header files are only needed when compiling. Both libraries where the same version 2.15.
    eglibc is glibc with few patches, it can't be so smaller.
    Last edited by LightBit; 05-07-2012 at 10:10 AM.

  8. #108
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Slovenia
    Posts
    390

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Yes and thanks to this MS was very strong in many areas.
    Particularly in a monopoly.


    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    The difference is there are people who care about being compatible with others and there are people who don't. I support interoperability in things like web, but I don't care when comes to other things. Those who are stronger dictate rules.
    So you don't care if your application is portable or not?

  9. #109
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    74

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    Particularly in a monopoly.



    So you don't care if your application is portable or not?
    All he cares about is that linux is #1, he is actually worse than a mac fanboy its really sad to read.
    This 'community' at phoronix is very close minded, they just want to replace MS's monopoly with
    one of linux.

    They are to cheap to buy windows or a decent pc that can handle windows 7, so they roll linux.
    They then login to phoronix to troll any topic that is not about linux, spewing great comments about
    how amazing KMS and udev is (lol).
    Last edited by soupbowl; 05-07-2012 at 12:45 PM.

  10. #110

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LightBit View Post
    As I said everything was "strip -s". Optimisations are -O2 on Arch Linux and I think it's the same on Ubuntu where I checked eglibc. Arch Linux has a bit newer GCC. Header files are only needed when compiling. Both libraries where the same version 2.15.
    eglibc is glibc with few patches, it can't be so smaller.
    But you have probably much older GCC in OpenBSD, so it will be good to check the same version. Also, you may find answers here:

    http://www.muppetlabs.com/~breadbox/...ny/teensy.html
    http://cs.mipt.ru/docs/comp/eng/os/l...f-howto-1.html

Posting Permissions

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