H. J. Lu writes: > On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 11:23:20AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote: > > Joe Buck writes: > > > On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 04:57:10PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > > > At this point, it doesn't feel like switching to 1.5.16 is worth the > > > > effort. 2.0 should be far more maintainable, and hopefully > > > > significantly more efficient on hosts where the use of shell functions > > > > optimized for properties of the build machine and/or the host > > > > machine can bring us such improvement. > > > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > Richard Henderson showed that the libjava build spends 2/3 of its time > > > in libtool, and that his hand-hacked (but not portable) modification to > > > invoke the appropriate binutils commands directly gave a huge speedup. > > > > Yes, but please bear in mind that this *only* happens when you have a > > machine with huge RAM. For other people with small RAM, the link > > itself is an important factor. Also, other people have found that the > > libtool script consumes a smaller part of total execution time: rth's > > measurements are at one extreme of the scale. > > We have been working on linker speed. If you have a number to show > that the GNU linker is very slow on certain things, I will take a > look.
I haven't, no. Ian Taylor reported the problem. Andrew.
