prelink should not mess with running executables

[Reindl Harald]

Am 15.07.2012 19:31, schrieb Jan Kratochvil:
> On Sun, 15 Jul 2012 15:50:39 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
>> only prelink is good with zero benefit?
> 
> Yes, without that "zero benefit".  prelink has provable startup performance
> improvement and runtime memory savings.

not practically


>> i did not notice ever any benfit of prelink even by
>> starting large applications
> 
> This is repeating argument again and again, there are many benchmarks of
> prelink if you have spent several seconds Googling them, one of them even here:
> 	Re: prelink: is it worth it?
> 	https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-July/msg00650.html

you must start openoffice damned often that the benfit beats out
the overhead of the /etc/cron.daily/prelink

>> it is broken by design modify installed/running binaries
> 
> ELF is designed to be relocated, as you can read from the ELF standard.
> And prelink is even designed to very easily provide the original binary form.

in theory well, but practically?

>> it is a solution becuase prelink is a "have solution seacrh for problem"
> 
> The problem is battery drain, everyone tries to optimize battery drain
> nowadays, to be "green" and to extend portable devices lifetime.
> prelink contributes to the battery drain solution.

you must start prelinked applications damend of
to beat the battery drain of /etc/cron.daily/prelink

> Unless you can claim we should compile everything with -O0

apples and pies

the compiler optimizing is made one time on the buildserver
for each installation, prelining eats ressources  on each
installation

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 262 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20120715/1c896017/attachment.sig>