prelink performance gains

[Jan Kratochvil]

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 16:28:07 +0200, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 17, 2013 at 7:22 AM, Paul Wouters <pwouters at redhat.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, 17 Oct 2013, Jan Kratochvil wrote:
> >> I agree there remains some work on prelink itself and some packages
> >> around to make prelink relevant again
> >
> > I don't mean to pick a fight with you Jan, but you are the only person
> > actively defending prelink right now. When even you reach the above
> > conclusions and cannot put in the time, and the maintainer isn't looking
> > at filed bugs for over a year, the only real answer is to turn prelink
> > into a dead.package for now.
> 
> There's no reason to kill the package entirely.  Some people still
> want to use it despite the current issues.  So just don't install it
> by default.  Reducing everything down to absolutes isn't helpful.

This is exactly my opinion which I have already expressed several times in
this thread.  prelink is useful on some systems (including mine) but I agree
it currently does more harm than good for average/default Fedora user.


Jan