On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:56:39PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 05:44:10PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: > >Hi Steve, > > Hey Mike, > > >On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 04:26:10PM +0100, Steve McIntyre wrote: > >> In terms of raw buildd CPU right now, I think we're doing OK, but > >> memory is more of a limiting factor with bigger C++ builds. > > > >As maintainer of such a package that pushes buildds limits, I have a > >question. > >Isn't memory really only a problem when linking C++ with big DWARF info? > > Honestly, I'm not 100% sure where all the memory is going. I do know > that at current rates of usage increase we'll struggle to link some > large programs (like browsers) on any 32-bit platform soon. > > >Would it be worth trying to link with gold for these? > > It might be, yes. I can try that with iceweasel on an imx53 or Panda > with 1GB if you like. Are there any non-obvious patches needed to the > packaging?
Apart from whatever is needed for gcc to use gold, there shouldn't be. Mike -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-arm-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120516191838.ga17...@glandium.org
