installing from source vs normal install
Hello,
I got an old laptop, that I want to run free on it, so Trisquel gnulinux is my choice.
Should I install from the source? Never did that, I would like too since I am curios, any advantages?
waiting for Trisquel/hurd!!! I know hurd is under active development but once it will done finally no more GNU/linux debate!!!
Besides not having to trust anybody (whoever builds the software could use different sources, possibly including malware), the main advantage of installing software from source is that you can choose the compilation options to get exactly what you want. On the other hand, compiling is very time/energy consuming (hours for large programs). If you believe you will get improved performance, forget it: sure, the compiler can take into account your specific CPU architecture to make a few additional optimizations but you will have a hard time measuring any difference, whereas you will definitely see the time you want for the compilation to be over!
If the laptop has 1GB of RAM, consider Trisquel Mini.
I
have 4gb of ram, its x200s, got it for cheap on the net, thanks Magic
Banana for the explanation, I think I will try the source, I am freaking
curios to see. After I plan in the future to add libreboot, probably
just buying the service since looks pretty hard.
What compilation options should I look for? I read the wikipedia page
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compiler
it says:
>Due to the extra time and space needed for compiler analysis and optimizations, some compilers skip them by default. Users have to use compilation options to explicitly tell the compiler which optimizations should be enabled.
any hints?
I was actually talking about the options the developers propose, typically to enable/disable optional modules. About the generic optimizations the compiler makes, you had better stick to at most -O2 because some programs show problems with -O3. The options -march=native an -mtune=native enable optimizations that depend on the instruction sets your CPU support. But, again, do not expect any visible gain of performance.
I am a translator!
>I know hurd is under active development
yeah.. over 30 years of active development.. :D
ayyylmao it hurds so much..
>If the laptop has 1GB of RAM, consider Trisquel Mini.
1gb of RAM was enough for me running the gnome-flashback standard ISO triquaello.
$ sudo apt-get install build-essential
Will install GCC, the GNU Compiler Collection & other essential softwares you’ll need to compile from source.
https://gcc.gnu.org/
read the enclosed “README”, “INSTALL” or other documentation provided by the developers, and you won’t go too far wrong.
https://www.maketecheasier.com/compile-linux-programs-source/
You may check before if build-essential is installed with
$ aptitude show build-essential
(If Aptitude) is installed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aptitude_debian, or
$ apt-cache show build-essential
$ apt-cache show gcc
"build-essential" is for those who build .deb packages. The description of "build-essential" starts with:
If you do not plan to build Debian packages, you don't need this package.
The "make" package provides GNU Make, the "gcc" package provides GCC, "libc-dev" provides the GNU C library, etc.
Even if you do not wish to build Debian packages "build-essentials" installs all the packages you mention above, https://packages.ubuntu.com/xenial/build-essential for you ( gcc, gcc++, make, libc-dev, dpkg-dev).
Nevertheless some packages such as "make" are often included by default in GNU/Linux distributions.
I know. But you do not need "dpkg-dev" if you do not build .deb packages, hence the description of "build-essential":
If you do not plan to build Debian packages, you don't need this package.
I think it is very hard but not a bad idea. I am following the linux from scratch build. Very complex, many dependency. Maybe for learning and building the essential...