[rescue] point of pride in SGI R10k vs. 1Ghz x86...

[Gregory Leblanc]

On Tue, 2001-11-13 at 11:04, Joshua D Boyd wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 13, 2001 at 12:04:44AM -0500, Dave McGuire wrote:
> > On November 13, Patrick Giagnocavo wrote:
> > > >   I wonder, Patrick...in this case, was gimp compiled to take full
> > > > advantage of the R10K processor, with a decent-for-MIPS-arch
> > > > (i.e. SGI's, not GCC) compiler?  If not, it's likely that it could do
> > > > even better.
> > > 
> > > I grabbed the binary version of Gimp 1.2 from freeware.sgi.com .  My
> > > guess is that it was SGI's compiler.
> > 
> >   In that case, it's likely to have been compiled to run on any
> > processor from the R4K up.  Compiling gimp is a bit of a pain, but you
> > might see significant performance gains when compiling specifically
> > for the R10K...so it might be worth the trouble!
> 
> Really, I thought compiling the gimp was so much easier on irix (6.2) than 
> it was on any version of linux I've used it on.  I literally just did 
> ./configure --path=~ && make && make install, and it went without any 
> hicups.  Err, the --path bit was because I didn't have root access to the 
> machine.  You would think that SGI was the native development environment 
> from how easy it was.

SGI is good to GNOME and GTK+ apps.  I get patches from @sgi.com emails
every time we break something so that it doesn't compile anymore.  I'm
always amazed at the trouble people have with compiling "stable" GNOME
apps.  I can usually even get very alpha things to compile on my Red Hat
boxen, and sometimes I even bother to try Solaris.
	Greg