From owner-cvs-all  Wed Feb 28  8:51:29 2001
Delivered-To: cvs-all@freebsd.org
Received: from harmony.village.org (rover.bsdimp.com [204.144.255.66])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP
	id 0F84337B718; Wed, 28 Feb 2001 08:51:20 -0800 (PST)
	(envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org)
Received: from harmony.village.org (localhost.village.org [127.0.0.1])
	by harmony.village.org (8.11.1/8.11.1) with ESMTP id f1SGp8d41759;
	Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:51:08 -0700 (MST)
	(envelope-from imp@harmony.village.org)
Message-Id: <200102281651.f1SGp8d41759@harmony.village.org>
To: Dag-Erling Smorgrav <des@ofug.org>
Subject: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/ar Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/as Makefile.inc0 src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/ld Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/ranlib Makefile 
Cc: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu>, obrien@FreeBSD.org,
	Wesley Morgan <morganw@chemikals.org>, cvs-committers@FreeBSD.org,
	cvs-all@FreeBSD.org
In-reply-to: Your message of "28 Feb 2001 17:29:40 +0100."
		<xzpn1b6py8b.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> 
References: <xzpn1b6py8b.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no>  <200102271125.f1RBPig49632@freefall.freebsd.org> <Pine.BSF.4.33.0102271746280.26953-100000@volatile.chemikals.org> <20010227150929.B72398@dragon.nuxi.com> <xzpg0gyyifl.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <20010228102308.K767@ohm.physics.purdue.edu> 
Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2001 09:51:08 -0700
From: Warner Losh <imp@harmony.village.org>
Sender: owner-cvs-all@FreeBSD.ORG
Precedence: bulk
X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG

In message <xzpn1b6py8b.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> Dag-Erling Smorgrav writes:
: Will Andrews <will@physics.purdue.edu> writes:
: > Why make make(1) statically linked?
: 
: Because a) you need it to recover from e.g. libc fuckups and b) it
: forks and execs a *lot*, and according to Bruce (I haven't verified
: this myself) programs that do that (e.g. shells) perform better and
: consume less system resources if they're statically linked.

So long as it is not forced unconditionally to be static.

We use make in our embedded devices for a couple of things and having
it dynamic is a good thing for its space savings.

a) happens very rarely (once since 3.0 and only in -current) and is
easy to work around (copy a good libc.so.X to /usr/lib).

b) I've not seen the numbers for this.  If it is only 1% faster, it
doesn't make sense, even though it sounds good on paper.

Warner

To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org
with "unsubscribe cvs-all" in the body of the message