Date: Fri, 26 Jul 1996 10:36:12 -0500 (EST) From: "John S. Dyson" <toor@dyson.iquest.net> To: mark@seeware.DIALix.oz.au (Mark Hannon) Cc: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Subject: Re: mfs /tmp, ffs /tmp or -pipe Message-ID: <199607261536.KAA03083@dyson.iquest.net> In-Reply-To: <Dv6AAq.3y4@seeware.DIALix.oz.au> from "Mark Hannon" at Jul 26, 96 10:54:26 pm
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
> > Hi, > > I've just been playing around with different ways to compile > the kernel. > > My, completely simple, measurement of kernel compile time > on a 2.1.5 P-100 are: > > ffs /tmp : 7:50 seconds > mfs /tmp : 7:30 seconds (with TMPDIR=/tmp) > cc -pipe : 7:22 seconds > > Fairly inconclusive and probably not repeatable. Anyway, > what I am asking is are there any documented advantages of > using an mfs /tmp?? Is -pipe a better option for compiles?? > I would expect that -pipe is best unless you are low on memory. You might actually find that 'ffs /tmp' is best on a 4MB or 8MB machine. I normally use an 'mfs /tmp' so that I don't have to change whatever makefiles that I have. John
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607261536.KAA03083>