On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 17:04:09 +0200, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 06:15:43PM +0400, Valeriy E. Ushakov wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 10, 2012 at 12:12:22 +0000, Joerg Sonnenberger wrote: > > > > > Module Name: src > > > Committed By: joerg > > > Date: Fri Aug 10 12:12:22 UTC 2012 > > > > > > Modified Files: > > > src/gnu/usr.bin/groff: Makefile.inc > > [...] > > > > > > Log Message: > > > Don't link explicitly against libsupc++, just use the normal C++ > > > linkage. > > > > Why? > > When using static linkage, it doesn't make a difference. When using > dynamic linkage, it stops the redundant copies. libstdc++ is not that > heavy loaded with constructors to provide a significant overhead.
By the same line of reasoning, libsupc++ is so tiny that redundant copies (a page or two of text) are not that much to provide significant overhead, certainly less overhead than libstdc++.so. Please, revert. -uwe
