Fedora 33 LTO Support Is Now In Good Shape For Faster, Smaller Packages

[pal666]

Just use Ubuntu with ZFS

it will bring neither btrfs nor lto, i.e. it's an exercise in self-punishment

Why BTRFS still even exists amazes me when you can get a smoooth as silk ZFS experience, designed by Sun Microsystems, the pinnacle of competence.

because you are imbecile who can't comprehend two simple facts: zfs design is obsolete and sun experience is available only on solaris, on ubuntu all you have is garage experience

[pal666]

It is my understanding that the value to most of the Linux distro vendors from their (free) desktop spins would appear to be the (free) testing they get.

your understanding is wrong. redhat gave their motivation when they bought centos

[leigh123linux]

Most code builds fine with -flto, but whenever I compile FFMPEG with -flto the build fails. Builds just fine without -flto

Try using the --enable-lto ffmpeg configure option

[DanL]

It would be great if Ubuntu would do the same.

This is something they probably leave to Debian to decide.

[wizard69]

Yes, but it would be bad news for Fedora to follow suit - we need GCC to remain competitive or the leading platform because the licence means it will always be available, which is a pretty important thing.

(There is a reason Apple spent $$$ getting LLVM into shape after GCC moved to GPL V3.)

So will LLVM/CLang. When it come right down to it neither license can assure availability. Either project could collapse for some unimagined reason.

[You-]

So will LLVM/CLang. When it come right down to it neither license can assure availability. Either project could collapse for some unimagined reason.

You cannot rule out collapse.

But you can rule out MegaCorps not releasing their contributions and changes made to the compiler.

[AdamOne]

I recently swiitched from F32 to F33 (Rawhide) and the performance impact is huge. The system (at least my aging notebook) is running quite performant now. It's noticable faster in any ways.

Thanks

Shut the front door!

[AdamOne]

Arch devs have work to do.

[vegabook]

Fedora is a far better distro than Ubuntu and even if Btrfs is inferior to ZFS in many ways, it's really NOT worth using an inferior distro just because of a filesystem.


Absolute nonsense. ZFS support has been added to make Ubuntu more competitive in the server segment. They don't expect to get any revenue from desktop, none ever does.

How is Fedora better than Ubuntu when it has less then 10% of Ubuntu's market share? Pray tell. What I believe is that that much derided aspect of Ubuntu, marketing, actually matters. That's because marketing costs money, and it takes a lot of thinking bandwidth. Ubuntu spends that time/money. Fedora just smacks out the very latest vanilla version of everything, thoughtlessly. Believe it or not, that NOT what most users want. They want a holistic, thoughtful, yes possible slow, approach. Ubuntu gets it. Fedora doesn't. Cue 10x success ratio Ubuntu:Fedora. I work in quant land and _all I see is purple screens_ with various vector animal graphics on them. Fedora is precisely NOWHERE anywhere that matters.

[vegabook]

Fedora is a far better distro than Ubuntu and even if Btrfs is inferior to ZFS in many ways, it's really NOT worth using an inferior distro just because of a filesystem.


Absolute nonsense. ZFS support has been added to make Ubuntu more competitive in the server segment. They don't expect to get any revenue from desktop, none ever does.

Oh dear. Captain, I'm afraid I must report that Startshipeleven is veering dramatically off course of all the Federation's simulations of what can possibly be deemed logical pathways of thought, yet again. Advisory: as before dismissal as perfunctory vacant diversion.