GCC 4.1: Buildable on GHz machines only?

[Alexandre Oliva]

On Apr 29, 2005, Jakub Jelinek <jakub@redhat.com> wrote:

> On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 10:47:06AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
>> Ian Lance Taylor writes:
>> > 
>> > And, yes, we clearly need to do something about the libjava build.
>> 
>> OK, I know nothing about libtool so this might not be possible, but
>> IMO the easiest way of making a dramatic difference is to cease to
>> compile every file twice, once with PIC and once without.  There would
>> be a small performance regression for statically linked Java apps, but
>> in practice Java is very hard to use with static linkage.

> Definitely.  For -static you either have the choice of linking the
> binary with -Wl,--whole-archive for libgcj.a (and likely other Java libs),
> or spend a lot of time adding more and more objects that are really
> needed, but linker doesn't pick them up.

> For the distribution, we simply remove all Java *.a libraries, but it would
> be a build time win if we don't have to compile them altogether.

We had a patch that did exactly this at some point, but RTH said it
broke GNU/Linux/alpha and never gave me the details on what the
failure mode was, and I wasn't able to trigger the error myself.  I
still have the patch in my tree, and it does indeed save lots of
cycles.

-- 
Alexandre Oliva             http://www.ic.unicamp.br/~oliva/
Red Hat Compiler Engineer   aoliva@{redhat.com, gcc.gnu.org}
Free Software Evangelist  oliva@{lsd.ic.unicamp.br, gnu.org}