Hello Kyle, first off, please do not top-post. Thank you.
* Kyle Sallee wrote on Sat, Oct 25, 2008 at 09:11:26PM CEST: > > I have no speed tests for the new stable libtool. [...] > Rehacking libtool to support a faster shell is a good idea. > But that should be done last after all the libtool shell syntax > is optimized and invocation of external programs is minimized. > Once libtool is properly optimized > then the impact of shell interpreter startup and execution speed > will have a significant impact upon libtool speed. I'm not sure what your discussion is supposed to lead to. We've spent quite some time getting Libtool 2.2.6 to be faster for many situations than 1.5.x, while *retaining* full compatibility with limited systems/shells/whatever other helper tools (and of course necessarily being slow on those limited systems). If you have applications that still show much libtool overhead, then please step forward with pointing out your package, and the use case, the system, shell etc. that you're using. It really needs such specific data for me to do anything about speed. And there is little point in complaining about 1.5.x speed without even trying out 2.2.6. Cheers, Ralf _______________________________________________ http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/libtool
