On Sun, Feb 25, 2007 at 09:18:27PM -0500, Paul Smith wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 20:15 +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
>
> > I profiled make. It's spending around 60% of the time in
> > new_pattern_rule(), which does a linear search through the list of
> > pattern rules to check for duplicate rules
On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 12:21 -0800, Roland McGrath wrote:
> > the old rule has 1 target (or multiple identical targets)
> > and
> > there exists a target in the new rule the same as the old rule's target
> >
> > See attached makefile which demonstrates this. Is that the correct
> > behaviour
On Wed, 2007-02-21 at 20:15 +, Mark Seaborn wrote:
> I profiled make. It's spending around 60% of the time in
> new_pattern_rule(), which does a linear search through the list of
> pattern rules to check for duplicate rules. glibc generates ~2500
> rules (in sysd-rules).
Holy moly! How in
> the old rule has 1 target (or multiple identical targets)
> and
> there exists a target in the new rule the same as the old rule's target
>
> See attached makefile which demonstrates this. Is that the correct
> behaviour? It seems like it would make more sense to compare the
> target lis
