On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 10:21 PM, Dave Korn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > NightStrike wrote on 21 June 2008 17:08: > >> On 6/21/08, Diego Novillo <dnovillo> wrote: >>> On Sat, Jun 21, 2008 at 11:39, H.J. Lu <hjl.tools> wrote: >>>> It takes about 50 minutes to bootstrap gcc with -j4 on a Core 2 Quad >>>> 2.66GHz with default language, both 32bit and 64bit enabled. If I use >>>> --enable-checking=assert, it takes 25 minutes. Given the price of quad >>>> core today, there is no >>>> reason no to >>>> use quad core for gcc build. >>> >>> Irrelevant. >> >> How is that irrelevant? If the argument is that libjava takes too >> long to build on modern hardware, and someone else has a different >> view of what is modern hardware where the original argument is >> invalid... > > And how exactly does this help non-x86 platform users? Or people without > the latest hardware? > > I don't think it aids the cause of software freedom to set a high barrier > to entry. Nor do I think it helps recruit volunteer workers for GCC. And I > really don't think it's right to just flippantly tell people they have to go > out and spend big money on the latest hardware in order to be able to > participate. Volunteers and voluntary orgs often don't have budgets or > funding.
There is the compile-farm that is available to volunteers. Richard.