Date: Sun, 5 Aug 2012 12:46:52 -0400 From: Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> To: musl@...ts.openwall.com Subject: Re: musl 0.9.3 released On Mon, Aug 06, 2012 at 12:31:12AM +0800, orc wrote: > On Sun, 5 Aug 2012 01:22:20 -0400 > Rich Felker <dalias@...ifal.cx> 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... Rich
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use? Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia and check out these guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.