Date: Tue, 06 Mar 2001 20:37:35 +0200 From: Maxim Sobolev <sobomax@FreeBSD.org> To: FreeBSD Current <current@FreeBSD.org> Subject: make(1) benchmarks [WAS: Re: cvs commit: src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/ar Makefile src/gnu/usr.bin/binutils/as Makefile.inc0 ...] Message-ID: <3AA52E6F.F660E94B@FreeBSD.org> 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> <xzpn1b6py8b.fsf@flood.ping.uio.no> <200102281651.f1SGp8d41759@harmony.village.org> <20010228123542.N767@ohm.physics.purdue.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Will Andrews wrote: > [ cc's trimmed, moved to -current ] > > On Wed, Feb 28, 2001 at 09:51:08AM -0700, Warner Losh wrote: > > So long as it is not forced unconditionally to be static. > > I agree. > > > 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. > > I will perform careful benchmarks and publish results. Can people wait > until that is done before moving forward please? Give me until Saturday. Any updates? My quick test involving running pkg_version on a system with 92 installed ports, which is very make-intensive operation if ports have origin recorded, as pkg_version(1) runs `make -V' for each port, shown that statically-compiled make is about 15% faster than dynamically-compiled. Sound like a reasonable speed gain for 100k binary size increase. What do people think? -Maxim To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?3AA52E6F.F660E94B>