Slashdot Mirror
Should You Pre-Compile Binaries or Roll Your Own?
Jane Walker writes "The completion of pre-compiled packages and maximizing machine performance are two powerful incentives for Windows admins to use Linux and compile an OSS package." TechTarget has an article taking a look at some of the "why" behind rolling your own. What preferences have other Slashdot users developed, and why?
Can we please avoid the "Gentoo and LFS" vs. "Everyone else" flamewar that will ensue?
Just in case, though, I'm getting my asbestos suit...
If you could boost performance by 10% by tweaking some compiler settings, you would have done so already (and a task so simple would not be worth a 100% pay raise). So your example is inapplicable to the argument.
While interesting, your link is completely tangental to the post you're replying to. Please do try to stay on topic. Thank you.
A Government Is a Body of People, Usually Notably Ungoverned
Always use pre-compiled binaries. It's a no-brainer. Source code is only for modifing something that the developers forgot or refused to do. And it's only for professionals with a lot of time on their hands. It is never cost or time-efficient to do your own compiling.
Any good reason for having the users of a program compile their own binaries is a good reason not to consider using Linux at all for anything serious. Because if there is any good reason to compile binaries then it means that the program is not stable or finished or even well-planned. And these kind of programs are ones that you don't want to mess around with unless you're getting paid for it or have some unusual emotional attachment to the application.
It's just common sense.
So I was curious about the author...
http://www.edtittel.com/etbio.htm
This is the shorter version...
Ed started out with an academic career in Anthropology. He then realized that digging up old bones had no future, so he got into computers in 1981.
Since then, Ed has been utilizing his anthropology experience in the computer field, by digging up old computing techniques and trying to do things the hard way, just like back when he started in 1981. That's why he advocates for you to compile your own version of every package rather than just accepting the defaults, like we did in the old days. Ed also advocates recompiling because it allows you to pick options, being completely unaware of new modern technologies such as dynamic link libraries(otherwise known as DLLs) which incorporate optional components at runtime instead of needing to be linked in at compile time.
Ed spends an awful lot of time writing books and articles instead of having to get real work done like most of us in the business, which is why he's so concerned with a stupid question like compiling packages from scratch.
In short... this is by far the stupidest article I've read this month on slashdot, and Zonk posts a lot of really dumb articles so that's really hitting the bottom of the barrel.