Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Xan Lopez
Hi, First a bit of context: for the GTK+ port of WebKit (www.webkitgtk.org) we are using autotools as our build system (autoconf+automake+libtool, the whole lot). We have a *lot* of files, so the resulting Makefile is about 9MB in size and takes, in my system, about 55s to go through a null-build

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Eric Blake
On 01/03/2011 04:43 PM, Xan Lopez wrote: > Alternatively, is there some well-known way to reduce either the size > or the processing time for the Makefile in huge automake projects?[1] Have you tried './configure --disable-dependency-tracking' as a way to make automake quit outputting -MP options

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Xan Lopez
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 12:46 AM, Eric Blake wrote: > On 01/03/2011 04:43 PM, Xan Lopez wrote: >> Alternatively, is there some well-known way to reduce either the size >> or the processing time for the Makefile in huge automake projects?[1] > > Have you tried './configure --disable-dependency-track

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Miles Bader
Xan Lopez writes: > I understand this can cause problems if, say, a file is removed from > the build tree or so, but it's very different to removing completely > dependency tracking (which indeed makes the null-build be essentially > 0s). Do you know _what_ is taking so long? I mean, disk I/O (s

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Xan Lopez
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 1:57 AM, Miles Bader wrote: > Xan Lopez writes: >> I understand this can cause problems if, say, a file is removed from >> the build tree or so, but it's very different to removing completely >> dependency tracking (which indeed makes the null-build be essentially >> 0s). >

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Miles Bader
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 10:22 AM, Xan Lopez wrote: >> Do you know _what_ is taking so long?  I mean, disk I/O (stats on a cold >> disk cache), user CPU time (inefficient algos in make), system CPU time >> (stats on a warm disk cache)...? > > Are you talking about the time to process those empty rul

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Xan Lopez
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Miles Bader wrote: >> Are you talking about the time to process those empty rules that are >> gone if you get rid of -MP or of the remaining 20 seconds? > > Both, I suppose.  I imagine both have the same inefficiency (just more > in the -MP case)... Most of the CPU

Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Xan
Hi, First a bit of context: for the GTK+ port of WebKit (www.webkitgtk.org) we are using autotools as our build system (autoconf+automake+libtool, the whole lot). We have a *lot* of files, so the resulting Makefile is about 9MB in size and takes, in my system, about 55s to go through a null-build

Re: Any way to get rid of -MP parameter to gcc for dependency creation?

2011-01-03 Thread Ralf Wildenhues
Hello Xan, thanks for the report. * Xan Lopez wrote on Tue, Jan 04, 2011 at 02:57:07AM CET: > I did a profile with sysprof but I really didn't know enough of GNU > make internals to figure out what was going on in detail; I can send > the output to the list if you think it could be useful. At lea

Re: support for a program that compile files (like yacc or lex support)

2011-01-03 Thread Vincent Torri
Hey, Wasn't what i want (see below) clear enough ? Vincent Torri First, it seems that i have deleted your answers while deleting other files. So I answer to my mail without your comments. Sorry for the inconvenience (the archive will not display this mail as an answer to your mail) On Mon,