[plug] Linux dist claims

[bk at bofh.ns.ca]

Hi,

> Whilst trying to improve my knowledge of linux I have come across sites
> offering alternative distributions of linux which make claims about
> improved GNUlibc2 being used and

Alternative to redhat?

> "Compiled with Pentium GCC 1.1, to make the system 10-30% faster." 
> 
> "Debugging flags removed on stable software (installing software
> with                    debugging turned on is optional), increasing
> system speed, and decreasing                   binary sizes." 

It sounds like those comments could have been made by redhat to encourage
people to purchase/download their distribution. With today's hardwar (CPU
and RAM), it is not really worth the effort to recompile everything in an
optimized way unless the program is CPU intensive (real time mp3 encoder
for example). And what do they mean by debugging? remove all printf calls?
:)

> Stampede Linux and BreoLinux make similar claims. Is it true and what
> does it mean?

A thought came to mind -- for server use. I assume there could be an
advantage optimizing everything to the limits. But would you be able to
tell the difference between a machine with optimized binaries or not? I'm
not sure about that one. It all comes down to CPU, RAM and HD.

> Are they worth trying? > 
You won't expect the ease-of-installation (so I've been told) of redhat.
Then again, making things hard encourages the user *to learn*. It's
basically choice. I was persuaded by a guy I knew to try debian since my
HD failed and it would have taken 1month to rebuild a slackware 2.3
install to current stuff (ELF) back in those days. I installed it first go
(without reading the documentation, very bad of me) and was proud to
change.

-David (bk at bofh.ns.ca)