This is the mail archive of the gcc@gcc.gnu.org mailing list for the GCC project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: reconfigured configure arg


On Sat, 1 Sep 2018, Jakub Jelinek wrote:

> Couldn't we do something smarter than this?
> Noticed while debugging why our bisect seed machine spends over 2 minutes in
> sed when handling config.status, and the reason apparently was that it has
> " : (reconfigured) " string in it 37753 times, so almost 700KB just in
> that.  If it is useful information how many times gcc has been reconfigured,
> can't we use a human readable form instead, where we add
> " : (reconfigured) " the first time and then just change it to
> " : (2x reconfigured) ", ..., " : (37753x reconfigured) " etc.?
> 
> Also, don't we actually add the above way $TOPLEVEL_CONFIGURE_ARGUMENTS
> multiple times (if not empty, that is)?

I think my original idea when adding this information in 
<https://gcc.gnu.org/ml/gcc-patches/2000-11/msg00289.html> was that, if 
reconfigured, the arguments in TOPLEVEL_CONFIGURE_ARGUMENTS might include 
synthetic ones created by config.status.  So simply using 
TOPLEVEL_CONFIGURE_ARGUMENTS (and ignoring the previous set of configure 
arguments) in the case of reconfiguration would give misleading results, 
but also not mentioning it at all would give misleading results if someone 
did in fact specify different configure options manually when 
reconfiguring.  I was not expecting 37753x reconfiguration.

Ideally the configure arguments shown would be the arguments specified 
manually (including multiple different such sets if necessary) but would 
not duplicate things for automatic reconfiguration with identical 
arguments, or with arguments identical except for whatever config.status 
adds automatically.

-- 
Joseph S. Myers
joseph@codesourcery.com


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]