GCC 4.1: Buildable on GHz machines only?

[H. J. Lu]

On Wed, May 04, 2005 at 11:23:20AM +0100, Andrew Haley wrote:
> Joe Buck writes:
>  > On Tue, May 03, 2005 at 04:57:10PM -0300, Alexandre Oliva wrote:
>  > > At this point, it doesn't feel like switching to 1.5.16 is worth the
>  > > effort.  2.0 should be far more maintainable, and hopefully
>  > > significantly more efficient on hosts where the use of shell functions
>  > > optimized for properties of the build machine and/or the host
>  > > machine can bring us such improvement.
>  > 
>  > > Thoughts?
>  > 
>  > Richard Henderson showed that the libjava build spends 2/3 of its time
>  > in libtool, and that his hand-hacked (but not portable) modification to
>  > invoke the appropriate binutils commands directly gave a huge speedup.
> 
> Yes, but please bear in mind that this *only* happens when you have a
> machine with huge RAM.  For other people with small RAM, the link
> itself is an important factor.  Also, other people have found that the
> libtool script consumes a smaller part of total execution time: rth's
> measurements are at one extreme of the scale.
> 

We have been working on linker speed. If you have a number to show
that the GNU linker is very slow on certain things, I will take a
look.


H.J.