[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Suppressing native compilation (short and long term)

From: Sean Whitton
Subject: Re: Suppressing native compilation (short and long term)
Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 16:51:12 -0700
User-agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux)


On Sun 02 Oct 2022 at 08:57AM +03, Eli Zaretskii wrote:

> The reasons which you mention in favor of AOT native compilation don't
> sound serious enough: I see no problem in having the compilation
> happen only when it's needed in those cases.  Battery consumption
> doesn't seem very relevant, because JIT compilation will happen when
> the system is used, not when it sleeps.  And it is entirely not
> guaranteed that by compiling everything you will save power in the
> long run, because there are good chances you will be compiling stuff
> that won't be used for a long time.  Without quantitative data of
> long-term power usage on which to base the conclusions, I don't see
> why you should a-priori assume that compiling everything from the
> get-go should use less power.  Same goes for disk space by multiple
> users.

The point with battery consumption is not about running vs. standby.
The issue is that while users expect that running apt-get will drain the
battery, they expect that once apt-get is done, the only battery-hungry
processes are ones they start themselves.  Laptop users typically avoid
running apt-get without mains power plugged in.  If I do an 'apt-get
upgrade' then afterwards my CPU will be churning away compiling addon
packages, so I can't just unplug.

Sean Whitton

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]