Date: Mon, 21 Apr 2003 07:32:35 -0500 From: Peter Schultz <peter@jocose.org> To: Kris Kennaway <kris@obsecurity.org> Cc: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Subject: Re: FreeBSD Port: setiathome-3.03_7 Message-ID: <3EA3E4E3.8050005@jocose.org> In-Reply-To: <20030420223609.GA79270@rot13.obsecurity.org> References: <3EA2AA58.2070007@jocose.org> <Xam2oG%2BxHa@dmeyer.dinoex.sub.org> <20030420223609.GA79270@rot13.obsecurity.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Kris Kennaway wrote: > On Sun, Apr 20, 2003 at 05:13:52PM +0200, Dirk Meyer wrote: > >>Hallo Peter Schultz, >> >> >>>I have been given the source code for setiathome-3.08 to build an >>>updated version for FreeBSD. Since I'm running 4.8-STABLE, I'd like to >>>add support for all versions of FreeBSD i386 2.2.5-4.x, as has been done >>>with the current binary. I'm sure there must be numerous ways to do >>>this, and I'm hoping someone can advise me. >> >>If you want to support FreeBSD 2.2.x you must create a.out binaries. >>Best way to do this is on a FreeBSD 2.2.x System. >>modern FreeBSD will run will be able to run this stil. >>Not sure how good cross-compiling for a.out works, >>but I can test on 2.2.8 here. > > > Support for a.out binaries on 5.0 requires a kernel compatibility > option. A native 4.x/5.0 ELF version (as well as the 2.x a.out > version) would be better. > I'll just build 4.8 and 5.0 versions then and see how that gets by. > >># file /usr/local/sbin/setiathome >>/usr/local/sbin/setiathome: FreeBSD/i386 compact demand paged executable >> >>It would be nice to have some versions optimzed ... > > > Yes. > $file setiathome-3.08.i386-unknown-freebsd4.8 setiathome-3.08.i386-unknown-freebsd4.8: ELF 32-bit LSB executable, Intel 80386, version 1 (FreeBSD), for FreeBSD 4.8, statically linked, stripped I agree, this application is more for platform advocacy than it is anything else these days. I use it to burn in machines because it helps peg the proc and memory. Yesterday I built it statically with optimized libc and libm. For libc I used `-O3 -pipe', because it wouldn't compile with the flags I used for libm and setiathome: `-O3 -fno-exceptions -fno-rtti -funroll-loops -fomit-frame-pointer -fno-strict-aliasing -fno-common -pipe'. Since I normally use `-O -pipe', I'm hoping there are people here who can give me optimization suggestions. Would making it i686 only help? So, I got a report back from a guy who tested it. He normally runs the linux binary and said that it's still about a half hour faster. If you've run setiathome much then you know a half hour difference is good because the work units vary. I gave him a reference unit used to test the clients. Anyway, one would have to use the reference unit on both to get a fair time trial. Anyone interested in testing please e-mail me. Thanks, Pete...
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3EA3E4E3.8050005>