FreeBSD 7.1 BETA 2 vs Opensolaris vs Ubuntu performance

Brooks Davis brooks at
Wed Nov 26 08:23:03 PST 2008

On Wed, Nov 26, 2008 at 03:03:45PM +0100, Ivan Voras wrote:
> O. Hartmann wrote:
> > Ivan Voras wrote:
> > ...
> > 
> >>
> >> OTOH if the goal is to measure "operating system" performance, this
> >> must also include the compiler, libraries and all. (for example, what
> >> does Solaris default to nowadays? I think it ships with gcc but not as
> >> default). The hold on gcc 4.3 in FreeBSD is, after all, political
> >> (licencing).
> > 
> > This is very bad to read :-(
> I agree. GPL 3 is a bit hard on the non-GPL systems (i.e. harder than
> GPL 2).

There are several things people can do to mitigate the issues here.

They can work to make it easier to completely replace the base compiler
with a port.  It seems not unlikely that FreeBSD distributions like
PC-BSD will eventually do this.

They can track GCC enhancements and when those enhancements are actually
compelling make a case for an upgrade.  We haven't closed the door on
that possibility, but the bar is quite high given the number of FreeBSD
customers who have a "no GPLv3 source in house, no exceptions!" policy.

They can work on LLVM support and integration.  Apple is putting a lot
of effort into both llvm-gcc and clang.  From the outside, it looks like
they consider that their future.  As such, it may well be ours.

-- Brooks
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 187 bytes
Desc: not available
Url :

More information about the freebsd-performance mailing list