From owner-freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Nov 26 06:03:23 2003
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-openoffice@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 39A4516A4CF
	for <openoffice@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 06:03:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mail.imp.ch (mail.imp.ch [157.161.1.2])
	by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A20043FA3
	for <openoffice@freebsd.org>; Wed, 26 Nov 2003 06:03:21 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from mb@imp.ch)
Received: from cvs.imp.ch (cvs.imp.ch [157.161.4.9])
	by mail.imp.ch (8.12.9p2/8.12.3) with ESMTP id hAQE3EEp060801;
	Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:03:17 +0100 (CET)
	(envelope-from Martin.Blapp@imp.ch)
Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 15:03:14 +0100 (CET)
From: Martin Blapp <mb@imp.ch>
To: Harald Schmalzbauer <h@schmalzbauer.de>
In-Reply-To: <200311261438.03768@harrymail>
Message-ID: <20031126150207.H82229@cvs.imp.ch>
References: <200311261438.03768@harrymail>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
cc: openoffice@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: Performance difference native/linux OOo1.1
X-BeenThere: freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1
Precedence: list
List-Id: Porting OpenOffice to FreeBSD <freebsd-openoffice.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-openoffice>,
	<mailto:freebsd-openoffice-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-openoffice>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-openoffice@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-openoffice-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-openoffice>,
	<mailto:freebsd-openoffice-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 26 Nov 2003 14:03:23 -0000


Hi,

> I am wondering why there is such a big performance difference between the
> linux and the native OpenOffice version on FreeBSD 5.2-beta (i386).
> For example starting the native OO takes about 30 seconds, where the Linux
> version takes about 5 seconds.

Hmm, could be a rtld issue. Can you trace the binary calls and see
where it spends so much time ?

> If some of you speak german please also have a look at:
> http://www.bsdforen.de/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=2177

Just did that. I'm swiss :)

Martin