Roland Mainz wrote: > "Laszlo (Laca) Peter" wrote: >> On Tue, 2008-04-15 at 05:20 +0200, Roland Mainz wrote: >>> Who did the libtool putback into the SFW gate ? >> That's a strange question. > > Why ? > >> Does it matter? > > Well, I'm interested to find someone who can guide me through my first > putback to SFWNV and one of my two choices (the other one is > http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=868) is to improve > libtool performance (no ARC case required - I just want to switch from > /usr/bin/bash to /usr/bin/ksh93 and maybe use "shcomp" - that's more > than good enougth for the FOX bits) to help my own team a bit...
There are more pressing problems with libtool which probably need to be addressed, before we start worrying about libtool performance. For one, i doubt anyone expects it to be a showcase of HPC. Being less of a pain to deal with would be a small step for libtool, and a giant leap for humanity. For starters, there are several Sun Studio flags in the -W<something>,<something> [ examples: -Wc,<something> or -Wu,<something>, etc ] category. These flags aren't used very often, but they are very useful. libtool silently removes some of these flags (but not all), because it does not like them. Ideally, it should allow us to pass any compiler flags verbatim. Second, there should be a libtool option to pass -norunpath when linking a shared object or an executable. Currently this is not possible without additional acrobatics. These two enhancements would be more useful to a wider audience than switching libtool shells for a 5% speed improvement. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman Sun Microsystems, Inc. stefan.teleman at Sun.COM
