Skip site navigation (1)Skip section navigation (2)
Date:      Wed, 20 May 1998 16:04:18 PDT
From:      "Brian Feldman" <brianfeldman@hotmail.com>
To:        jhs@muc.de
Cc:        freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG
Subject:   Re: Next 3.0 SNAP CD coming up.
Message-ID:  <19980520230420.28754.qmail@hotmail.com>

next in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
1) FreeBSD is made to be a server and workstation operating system. As 
such, we want more speed (pipes) and less security risks (using tmp 
files is a _bad_ security risk). As such, most machines have enough RAM 
to do this effectively, and swap is mandatory on FreeBSD systems. On low 
memory systems, I doubt highly there would be a difference in 
performance between -pipe and tmp files, since both would require use of 
disk space temporarily.
2) Most people _would_ want to have it -pipe by default; the tmp files 
are a BAD standard and should be gotten rid of to ease security and 
raise performance. Hence most people who know enough to use it would 
want -pipe enabled, and FreeBSD being a hacker OS, that is a majority of 
the people. How can you argue with inconveniencing a minority to do 
something that would help the majority?

Brian Feldman

>From jhs@phil.jhs.no_domain Wed May 20 08:33:15 1998
>Received: from jhs.muc.de ([193.174.4.84]) by colin.muc.de with SMTP id 
<140580-2>; Wed, 20 May 1998 15:33:15 +0200
>Received: from phil.jhs.no_domain (localhost [127.0.0.1])
>	by jhs.muc.de (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id WAA01359;
>	Tue, 19 May 1998 22:47:56 +0200 (MET DST)
>	(envelope-from jhs@phil.jhs.no_domain)
>Message-Id: <199805192047.WAA01359@jhs.muc.de>
>To: "Brian Feldman" <brianfeldman@hotmail.com>
>cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org
>Subject: Re: Next 3.0 SNAP CD coming up.
>From: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@freebsd.org>
>Reply-To: "Julian H. Stacey" <jhs@muc.de>
>X-Post: Holz Strasse 27d, 80469 Munich, Germany
>X-Email: jhs@freebsd.org			(& jhs@muc.de & jhs@jhs.muc.de )
>X-Web: http://www.freebsd.org/~jhs/	(& http://www.muc.de/~jhs/ )
>X-Tel: +49.89.268616
>X-Fax: +49.89.2608126
>X-Data: +49.89.26023276
>In-reply-to: Your message of "Tue, 19 May 1998 06:03:16 +0200."
>		<19980519040316.22617.qmail@m2.findmail.com>
>Date: Tue, 19 May 1998 22:47:52 +0200
>Sender: jhs@jhs.muc.de
>
>"Brian Feldman" wrote:
>> 2) Can anyone think of one good reason not to have gcc go -pipe by 
default? I
>> t would make some sense to do so, and then to add a -nopipe switch, 
seeing th
>> at there should be no reasons not to use -pipe in 100% of the 
situations with
>>  using all pipeable tools, cpp, gcc, and gas. Any reason not to? If I 
get the
>>  go-ahead, I'll submit the patch.
>
>Q. Is it nicer to have it pipe by default, & turn off manually, or vice 
versa ?
>A. It depends on perspective: few people with just a small machine 
would want
>   it to default to On, & few with just a big machine would want it to 
default
>   to Off, & people with a mix of machine sizes will be inconvenienced 
about
>   equally by either default. All users will be affected if the default
>   is changed.
>
>Any change (either way) would be gratuitous, but to enable pipes by
>default would bring us one small step further away from a `least 
suprise'
>evironment:  I believe the FSF/GCC default on (random) boxes such as 
HP-UX etc,
>defaults to pipe off; so should we, 'till (if) GNU changes it's 
default.
>
>- Not all hosts have lots of RAM/Swap
>- Not everyone has cash to buy more RAM, or even sockets to plug more 
RAM into
>  (think Compaq RAM cards & laptops), not all even have docu. on old 
inherited
>  motherboards, to know how to reconfig. old main boards for more ram.
>- FreeBSD runs on 4M (yes I know std. install needs 5M now),
>- Some bigger machines may be running multi user with login.conf 
accounting
>  RAM limits set to modest thresholds, & more RAM ==> less users on the 
box.
>- My main box happens to have 64M, so already uses /etc/make.conf 
>  CFLAGS= -O2 -m486 -pipe	COPTFLAGS= -O -pipe    ;
>  but my smallest test box with 8M does not, & I expect I'll soon 
inherit a
>  Toshiba 486 with 4M, (as Gates-OS has bloated beyond owner's fit),
>  & I look forward to putting FreeBSD on that little free laptop & 
showing 
>  friends how FreeBSD can use what Gates-OS can not. It too will not 
pipe,
>  so will not fit within your 100% of all FreeBSD PCs :-).
>
>Julian
>--
>Julian H. Stacey         jhs@freebsd.org         
http://www.freebsd.org/~jhs/
>


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message



Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19980520230420.28754.qmail>