On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 09:18:38PM +0200, Mike Hommey wrote: >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.
OK, cool. Building with ld and gold on a panda right now, to see how they compare. -- Steve McIntyre, Cambridge, UK. st...@einval.com Welcome my son, welcome to the machine. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-release-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/20120517135447.gb9...@einval.com
