----- Original Message -----
From: "Charles Shannon Hendrix" <email@example.com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 07, 2007 9:49 PM
Subject: Re: Some Unix benchmarks for those who are interesed
> On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:30:12 +0100
> Ivan Voras <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>> Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
>> > On Wed, 07 Mar 2007 17:11:24 +0100
>> > Ivan Voras <email@example.com> wrote:
>> >> Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
>> >>> BYTE UNIX Benchmarks (Version 4.1-wht.1)
>> >> Off-topic: Who or what is the origin of the "wht" version? One of the
>> >> nice things about unixbench is that it hadn't changed from 1997, but now
>> >> most Linux variants use the -wht version that has completely different
>> >> baselines and results from the "normal" version?
>> > It's a version created for the website: webhostingtalk.com.
>> > It was created to have a stable and standard benchmark.
>> Beautiful - they fiddled with the baselines but still managed not to see
>> the obvious problem in execl() call in the execl benchmark for 64-bit
> Or maybe they just don't care?
> It seems to me they use the software a lot and it serves their purposes.
> It's just a standardized version and run script that they use to evaluate web
Hmm. if the whole world uses wht version of unixbench maybe someone should
update freebsd ports version to this wht version, because otherwise we cannot
compare anything else than freebsd. Not good.