Hey Phoronix!

Compiler flags are shown on the benchmark results themselves. Generally, the compiler flags used during testing are whatever the default flags that are set by the upstream program under test. The Phoronix benchmark philosophy is all about real-world, reproducible tests -- such as if most users obtaining the package manually are just doing ./configure; make; make install. The real-world tests are also targeted at end-users; I think this is where some of the disconnect comes in over testing methodology as it tries to be representative for a majority of the Linux end-users. This is also why Ubuntu is mostly used with Phoronix tests... There are, of course, also Phoronix benchmarks that look specifically at compiler tuning with different optimization levels, CPU targets, etc.

"a FreeBSD kernel with debug info compiled in"

This was one or two articles -- out of 2,000+ articles and 6,000+ news posts I've written -- quite a while ago when the FreeBSD camp didn't make clear all of the debugging options they had enabled within their kernel.

What Martin didn't know at the time of his blog posting that it was one of several articles being written on the subject... You can find many other window manager / DE benchmarks on Phoronix with a variety of GPUs/drivers/systems testing the "out of the box" performance.

I'm not saying that mistakes don't happen, as they obviously do when covering many different areas and single-handedly writing thousands of articles while also engaging in other full-time projects that consume 100+ hours total per week. And for those who get all bent out of shape over the occasional beer photo or "alcohol propaganda", it's completely silly, especially when those photos are used to subtly hint ('leak') at future details about a given product/topic if you read enough into the beer selected, photo details, etc.

>Since when is the number of referrals from linux.com an indicator for quality journalism?

You are really hilarious, did you know that? Linux.com picks up the best stories around the net, and you dismiss that evidence because you believe they are not able to spot good journalism when they see it. But you on the other hand, you really know how to judge, right? Do you even believe yourself?

>compiler benchmarks without optimization enabled

Hm, phoronix is the only site on earth that benches compiler optimizations. It is an established reference for comparing clang and gcc (and any other compiler for that matter), e.g., check out the wikipedia page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clang (ooops, sorry, forgot that you do not recognize any such reference as evidence of anything). The only time anybody got close was about five years ago following some heated discussion on aceshardware, where some windows oriented sites followed up by comparing different compilers on Intel and AMD hardware. Maybe you find the SPEC submissions more informative, is that it? I am grasping for straws here you see. Really twisting my brain to see if there is anything in yours, so please help me out.

>meaningless compositor comparisons (see the kwin developer's blog entry about that))?

Hm, you didn't catch that those "meaningless benchmarks" was necessary to uncover performance issues in Unity, which again is rather critical for the forthcoming Steam on linux? Maybe Martin didn't get that either, and thought there was free hunting season on journalists (as if there is a plethora of journalists covering free software). KDE has had it's performance issues, and I am pretty sure I can dig out cases where the compositor is an important part of the picture. Just days ago I had to show a colleague of mine how to turn off desktop effects in KDE on Red Hat 6 to get decent 3D performance, yes we are talking about the people paying for all that beautiful work produced at Red Hat (and where do you think your beloved OS would be without it?). Martin should be grateful somebody want to benchmark his software. You really enjoy digging out flames in the community trying to pitch us up against each other, don't you? Do you find it entertaining? Have you ever considered the quality of the content you publish here?

>Continuous alcohol propaganda?

Are you telling me that you don't enjoy an occasional beer? Maybe you got provoked by Michael offering free beer to linux-supporters? Or maybe you simply feel left out because you haven't had the opportunity to share a couple of beers with fellow members of the community? In any case you have my deepest sympathy. If you like I can give you advice on how to handle your situation. I believe there are a number of effective solutions depending on your condition. Hang on a minute, I have had a hard day at work and I could really use a stiff drink now... Ah back again. There are few things like an Islay single malt. My absolute favourite is Lagavulin, distillers edition. Sure you don't want one? OK, your choice.

>Dubious language (yes, calling things "crap" and "mess" is extremely dubious for a journalist)?

Indeed it is, I love it. It really is refreshing, don't you agree? (the smell of Lagavulin is really unique, just a tiny drop of water in it is perfect, ah)

>Dozens of articles where the only news is that there is no news?

Eh, I only had one glass of whisky, but my eye sight must be failing. The links you gave had interesting updates on the state of various open projects, none of which I was aware of until I read the articles at phoronix. Are you really sure you haven't been drinking? Ah, I get it, you have been smoking some heavy shit. Let me give you a piece of friendly advice, stay off the pot, stick to the alcohol. Lemmy and Jim Morrison cannot both be wrong. Alcohol is the king of drugs.