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. H.J.