From owner-freebsd-hackers Wed Apr 26 20:35:49 2000 Delivered-To: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org Received: from alcanet.com.au (mail.alcanet.com.au [203.62.196.10]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id EB69337B670 for ; Wed, 26 Apr 2000 20:35:44 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from jeremyp@gsmx07.alcatel.com.au) Received: by border.alcanet.com.au id <115207>; Thu, 27 Apr 2000 13:36:11 +1000 Content-return: prohibited From: Peter Jeremy Subject: Re: commit MAKE_SHELL? To: hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Message-Id: <00Apr27.133611est.115207@border.alcanet.com.au> MIME-version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0i Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2000 13:36:11 +1000 Sender: owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG On Tue, 25 Apr 2000 23:00:07 -0700, Doug Barton wrote: >Anatoly Vorobey wrote: > >> Well, *should* we have a built-in "test"? I gather the original ash didn't >> have it due to the KIS principle. But if it speeds things up considerably, >> it's not much of a bloat, is it? I'd volunteer to write it. > > Unfortunately, the only way to tell for sure would be to do a couple >make worlds with the current sh, then do some with super-sh with the >built in 'test'. A somewhat quicker (though not quite as accurate) check is to do a make buildworld with accounting on. Based on this, the most-executed (>1000) commands (after merging aliases) are: 23743 cpp 23912 sh sh* 17060 cc 15583 as 13689 cc1 17934 test [ 12544 ld 11725 mv 7366 make 4904 rm 2999 ln 2160 sed 2102 gzip 1454 mkdir (There was some other system activity, but I don't think it would affect the results). This suggests that making test/[ a builtin would probably help, but probably not nearly as much as reducing the number of shells exec'd (ie making make(1) a bit smarter). Peter To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-hackers" in the body of the message