Jonathan Stone said:
> 
> In case it wasn't clear, I'm saying that _if_ this is what is being
> done, then claiming 2.5x-3x _without_ also saying clearly that your
> numbers excluded the necessary cache-load time, is dishonest.  If
> someone from NetBSD did the same thing on a FreeBSD list, I'm sure
> John and others would call them for it.  Rightly so, too.
> 
> But I'm not sure that's what is going on here.  Its hard to tell while
> John is being so coy on the question and with  the details of the test
> in general.
> 
It is including make depend.  I am NOT being coy, and it can be made
more complex than it is, or can be taken as it is at face value.  The
most accurate evaluation will be if you take it at face value.  If
you had any idea about what I have at stake, you would know that you
should take what I say as a suggestion for future research and
work.

Nothing is being purposefully hidden.  When discussing things,
seeing assertions about relative perfromance, I assume that the
individuals really know something about what they are talking about.
If they mention FreeBSD, I assume they really do know what they are
saying.

It goes without saying that I assumed that you knew that we have
had a merged cache for about 3yrs...  It is not a big deal, other
that it can be part of a significant difference in performance.  There
are alot of things that I even forget that we have done, because
they are mostly behind us now, and we are moving forward.


-- 
John                  | Never try to teach a pig to sing,
dyson@freebsd.org     | it just makes you look stupid,
jdyson@nc.com         | and it irritates the pig.