As for this "OS" in question, I'm amazed someone went to this much effort for a troll. Micheal himself must have been having a fair old chuckle even writing the article, as all the claims made by the project are somewhat easy to see through and just way too outlandish.
Last edited by ElderSnake; 06-05-2013 at 09:32 PM.
And even that code seems to be stolen without credit, from Stack Overflow user Tronic:Code:# koko-wawa, is a LSX utility to benchmark your kernel's switching behaviour # # Created by Ahmed G. Elnil <firstname.lastname@example.org>, SphinUX Community, Alexandria, Egypt - 2013 # # Feel free to use, it's public domain # Measuring actual sleep delays when requesting ...
Last edited by stevenc; 06-05-2013 at 09:49 PM.
I've just send a complaint with many of the points discussed here to SourceForge to have the project removed. We have way more than enough proof to show that this is a shady distro not created in the interest of its users with developers that steal code and ignore software licenses.
Here is the exact script I'm referring to: http://paste.kde.org/759530/
The screenshot is being captured at line 34 and 35, the fake authentication is at line 81, and the upload process is at line 53. Another thing to note is that all of the data is uploaded though unsecured HTTP. It is incredibly easy for someone to sniff out this information using a tool like Wireshark.
According to this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AqupsTFyuGE ... it boots and is recognized as a 2.6.32 Linux kernel (look on the boot sequence, at 17:06 ), so it looks to me that this SphinuX is more or less a modularizing effort inside the Linux kernel that may reduce in some use-cases the IO and/or maybe some kernel modules.
I think that the 100% and 300% kind of speedups refer just to the use-cases when this new infrastructure reduces the IO (so in an I/O kind of benchmark it may work like 2-3 times faster) and the memory is again related with the minimalist kind of loading of the drivers.
As it looks, it uses standard compilers (like GCC) and similarly standard file systems (Ext3 and Ext4), so the Phoronix like benchmarking, which stresses the user-space I think it will behave (more or less) like a 2.6.32 kernel with some patches on it. Also, the source doesn't say 100% or things like this performance speedup against what. I think that is in case of Ext4 with encryption vs Ext4 with Xor++ (their encryption scheme).
So based on what is written, I can expect the following:
- some boot scenarios would boot faster on a similar package selection and using a bit less kernel memory
- for embedded cases, the kernel can be "up-to" 300% smaller memory
- in low memory systems, where it will be more IO, the smaller kernel (Sphinx) may work a bit better
- on disk encrypted disks, a faster encryption scheme, which may be "good enough" may be faster than Ext4 than the default Ubuntu with Encryption
What would not happen:
- Sphinux would run the same CPU bound codes (which are computed in user-space or on video card, but not on kernel) to be more than 5% faster/slower than 2.6.20+ kernels, so Michael will be able to "bust" the myth
- Database benchmarks or IO tests without encryption on Ext4 should work similarly as a 2.6.32 kernel
- Loading KDE or whatever environment with similar package selection will look and feel as any bare-metal Debian with the same package selection. SphinuX would have more bugs, but other than this, will feel very "upstreamy". Both memory wise and performance
But Michael is right, the specifics should be told, writing "100% speedup" or "300% less memory" without putting some strings attached is a bit misleading (to say it kindly) and it would be great if the value numbers come with a methodology about how it can be this way.