From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/1415 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: orc Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: musl 0.9.3 released Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2012 01:18:57 +0800 Message-ID: <20120806011857.0beadbfe@sibserver.ru> References: <20120803023633.GG544@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <9251.50.0.229.11.1344128449.squirrel@lavabit.com> <501DEF70.6060900@barfooze.de> <40178.50.0.229.11.1344142584.squirrel@lavabit.com> <20120805052219.GH544@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <20120806003112.4fd471cd@sibserver.ru> <20120805164652.GJ544@brightrain.aerifal.cx> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1344187266 5934 80.91.229.3 (5 Aug 2012 17:21:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 17:21:06 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-1416-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Sun Aug 05 19:21:06 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sy4Vf-00007t-OG for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Sun, 05 Aug 2012 19:20:59 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 3322 invoked by uid 550); 5 Aug 2012 17:20:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 3256 invoked from network); 5 Aug 2012 17:20:54 -0000 In-Reply-To: <20120805164652.GJ544@brightrain.aerifal.cx> X-Mailer: claws-mail Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:1415 Archived-At: On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 12:46:52 -0400 Rich Felker wrote: > On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:31:12AM +0800, orc wrote: > > On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 01:22:20 -0400 > > Rich Felker wrote: > > > > > If I were going to switch to x86_64 cpu, which I will probably do > > > in the next few years, x32 would certainly be appealing. Not > > > decided for sure, but it seems very nice to get all the important > > > benefits of a 64-bit cpu with none of the bloat. > > > > Somewhat bloated, but not so much. Often I see only that massive > > apps like web browsers eat much of RAM usually. 2G usually enough > > for me to run 3-4 qemu-kvm's and bloated Firefox 12 (eats about > > 700M usually, critical was 1G and 100M swap, 1 month of it's > > uptime). Now I use 4G (additional 2G is for tmpfs. I like to store > > large blobs in /tmp often). I use x86_64 for 3 years without any > > problems. If Firefox (or any application of same class, chromium > > probably) will continue to grow, then five or seven years will be > > enough to make x32 be obsoleted (compared with ff3, it's maximum > > memusage was 300M, and for 3.6 it was 400M). > > Assuming the market is shifting to battery-powered mobile devices > possibly intended to run for days or even weeks without charging, I > think we're going to start seeing some more efficient apps. I don't > doubt the old behemoths will still be around for a while, but musl is > developed with the assumption/intention that efficiency is going to be > one of the important design criteria for future software. If we were > happy with the level of bloat you're describing above, I think lots of > people in this community would just forget about musl and use glibc... I agree with you here. I hope that shift will force appmakers to make their software much more better and efficient. > > Rich