Why long command line for libgcj.so?

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Jun  5, 2002, "David S. Miller" <davem@redhat.com> wrote:

>    From: Alexandre Oliva <aoliva@redhat.com>
>    Date: 05 Jun 2002 16:20:50 -0300
   
>    On the contrary: it does it this way because it's more efficient.

> It's not more efficient if it makes the person's machine
> go into swap, which is what it does do for many people
> trying to build libjava.

So are you claiming that linking with an archive is much more
efficient than linking with the separate object files that constitute
the archive?  Do you have any data to back this claim?  That's as much
as H.J.'s patch accomplishes, in addition to increasing build times by
introducing the creation of an unnecessary, large archive, unless your
implied claim is true.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva   Enjoy Guarana', see http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat GCC Developer                  aoliva@{cygnus.com, redhat.com}
CS PhD student at IC-Unicamp        oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist                Professional serial bug killer