Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 15:45:18

Why there's only i686 prebuild packages for arch in the main arch server? It would be really easy to have other builds.

Pierre · 2006-11-02 15:48:40

no, there are x86_64-packages, too.

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 18:01:50

yes, that's right.

My point is that I have my computer running 24h. I could set it to run abs and compile new packages, but the question is... where to upload them?

i would make packages 4 athlon-xp.

Cerebral · 2006-11-02 18:20:53

From the frontpage:

You've reached the website for Arch Linux, a lightweight and flexible linux distribution that tries to Keep It Simple.
Currently we have official packages optimized for the i686 and x86-64 architectures

Arch started out as an i686-only distro. It was designed to be simple - plus I believe some testing was done and optimizations for, say, athlon-xp aren't all that much faster than i686 in general, and it's usually just not worth the hassle to do a ton of different optimized builds.

1c3d0g · 2006-11-02 19:29:45

Cerebral: agreed.

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 19:40:41

well, my experience is that things like imlib2 help a lot in optimizing your speed when they are compiled for your architecture.

Skyscraper · 2006-11-02 22:33:35

Pajaro wrote:

well, my experience is that things like imlib2 help a lot in optimizing your speed when they are compiled for your architecture.

What else is worth recompiling?

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 22:52:02

Skyscraper wrote:

Pajaro wrote:
well, my experience is that things like imlib2 help a lot in optimizing your speed when they are compiled for your architecture.
What else is worth recompiling?

There was a time in which i used srcpac for my main apps. I got into a point in which i got tired of having the computer compiling so much time.

I could feel more softness in my system.

I ended staying without recompiled apps, because i couldn't leave that computer recompiling at night, so it made me behave slower.

Why does swiftfox exist?

Dusty · 2006-11-02 22:56:33

Xentac is (slowly) working on a system to help synchronize cross-architecture stuff. The 64 bit port is tough because some packages require altered PKGBUILDs. But if you wanted to optimize for athlonXP, I'm pretty sure it would require no modification to the PKGBUILDs. Creating a custom repository for it should be fairly simple. If you get a few other people interested, its possible you could make it into an official project.

Having said that, I'm also dubious that the improvement over 686 would be worth the effort. Only one way to find out.

Dusty

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 23:08:00

i am recompiling gimp after having timed it several times followed.

I don't know if gimp is the optimal package to do the test. I think that a complete test would be recompile the whole system, but for that I need a script that helps me a bit. Srcpac is good enough? Does it mark dependency installs as dependency installs?

How can I time the boot process? I saw some cool graphs that show that.

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 23:08:51

By the way, good news the work of xentac

Dusty · 2006-11-02 23:31:18

Well, you can rebuild all the packages in abs using makeworld.... wonder how long that would take. I'm not sure if srcpac'll do it or not.

Here's Xentac's work:
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pacbuild
http://xentac.net/~jchu/blog/static/pacbuild

I know he's still actively interested in it, if not actively maintaining it. I'm sure he'd be happy to hear and provide advice if you intend to test it.

Dusty

Pajaro · 2006-11-02 23:51:47

I offered my machine.

Let's see if i can help in anything else.

thanks, dusty

Arch Linux

#1 2006-11-02 15:45:18

Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#2 2006-11-02 15:48:40

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#3 2006-11-02 18:01:50

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#4 2006-11-02 18:20:53

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#5 2006-11-02 19:29:45

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#6 2006-11-02 19:40:41

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#7 2006-11-02 22:33:35

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#8 2006-11-02 22:52:02

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#9 2006-11-02 22:56:33

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#10 2006-11-02 23:08:00

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#11 2006-11-02 23:08:51

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#12 2006-11-02 23:31:18

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

#13 2006-11-02 23:51:47

Re: Why only i686 in ftp.archlinux.org?

Board footer