On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 03:59:10PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > On Thu, Aug 16, 2007 at 01:24:05AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 07:12:04PM +0200, Enrico Forestieri wrote: > > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2007 at 09:54:01AM +0200, Andre Poenitz wrote: > > > > > > > The problem with automake+libtools is that it takes about twice as much > > > > time as either scons, cmake or qmake in the 'building backend'. > > > > > > On linux I don't see any difference wrt the previous setup. > > > > Is thiss 'full recompile' or 'null make' or 'simple roundtrip'? > > Also, do you use ccache? > > Full recompile, starting with a fresh build tree and without ccache. > This is with a dual core CPU [EMAIL PROTECTED] and 2Gb ram. > > > > It takes about 15 minutes to build everything from scratch on my new > > > laptop. > > > > I.e. no ccache? If so, the compile times may outweigh the time spend on > > libtools. That's not the case with ccache. > > I see that ccache performance is eavily dependent on the system. > You gain a lot on linux, where autotools are already blazingly fast, > only a bit on solaris sparc, where autotools are not that fast, > and nothing on Windows, where autotools are..., well..., snailtools... > So, ccache only helps who doesn't need help :(
Oh, on Linux autotools are slow, too. Guess why I want to get rid of it. Running a 7000 line script (libtool) on top of the usual compiler work does not really help performance. > > > I wonder how would you feel if you had to build on cygwin, where > > > it takes more than an hour on the same hardware... > > > > > > I back the request from Christian, and suggest that you revert your > > > changes and work in a branch ;-) > > > > I do that on Friday if things have not stabilized until then. Until then > > I would be grateful to get reports on what configuration exactly is not > > working. > > Seems that it is ok now. I can statically link on both Windows and > Linux (haven't tried on Solaris, still), even if on Windows I continue > getting bogus warnings from libtool, that behaves as if it was building > a shared library (maybe it is so because of the rpath argument). > > So, everything works, AFAIK. Ok. Glad to here that. No I need only a positive report from a Mac user. Andre'
