P.S Is there any changes in performance if change in kernel conf i386 to i686?
"Some reasons why you should not build a custom kernel: You do not need to, normally. You will not get a faster system." Can this applies to my question? > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: OpenBSD 5.1 i386- ports vs packages > Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 17:29:36 +0000 > > Thank you all for the detailed answers. Is there any changes in compiling if > recompile kernel with option machine i686, now uname shows i386? > > > Date: Mon, 7 May 2012 14:03:40 +0100 > > From: [email protected] > > To: [email protected] > > Subject: Re: OpenBSD 5.1 i386- ports vs packages > > > > On Sun, 6 May 2012 04:03:46 +0200 > > ropers wrote: > > > > > As for security, since the Openbsd.org packages and ports both come > > > from the same source, there's no security advantage of ports over > > > packages unless you don't trust OpenBSD.org and actually read all of > > > the source code you compile (and, by the way, do the same for your > > > whole compiler toolchain). > > > > With one exception. If you are running stable rather than current, > > only security fixes for server packages like dovecot are pushed into > > ports and so building may be desired as the devs valuable time is spent > > moving forwards. In current (snapshots are almost current) there are > > pre-built snapshot packages and a snapshot ISO to upgrade from so you > > should though it's not always guaranteed be able to just upgrade to the > > latest snapshot base (install51.iso) and update to the latest snapshot > > packages. If it fails try again a few days later. You could image or > > use an identical test machine/partition for that if the stable branch > > level of guarantee is required.
