On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 10:43:57 +0100, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Scott A Crosby writes: > > On Thu, 28 Apr 2005 10:29:32 +0100, Andrew Haley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > writes: > > > > > Having said that, I suspect that the single biggest improvement to the > > > libgcj build time would be either to remove the libtool shell script > > > altogether or find some way to reduce its use or make it faster. > > > > > > > bash is the third-most prominent program in the result of a full 'make > > bootstrap' oprofile on gcc-4.1-20050424 configured with > > --disable-checking. A few other breakdowns, including for jc1 and cc1 > > exist on http://www.cs.rice.edu/~scrosby/tmp/GCC/ > There was a difference in the way that I did the measurements, in that > I separated out the shell used by libtool and the shell used for all > other shell scripts. If there is interest and you tell me how, I can do this. > However, there is another major disparity here, in that on your box > jc1 uses much more cpu than bash. I don't know why that might be. I oprofiled a full bootstrap and you oprofiled just building libgcj? Scott
