Tobias Klausmann posted on Thu, 30 Aug 2012 09:03:59 +0200 as excerpted: > On Thu, 30 Aug 2012, Duncan wrote: >> Now, for worst-case comparison, on the same machine, what's the >> respective times for a full systemd build? (I'm not saying actually >> merge it, just configure/compile, plus see the next paragraph.) > > I think my first set of numbers illustrates that: just running "make" > should be a full build, AIUI. For that scenario (and the machine in > question, the factor was somewhere between 9 and 10 times slower for a > full build.
You're correct. I was misinterpreting those first numbers as running what the ebuild ran, but manually, not as a full "make". So naturally I came to the wrong conclusion about them and figured the full systemd build would be even worse! Thanks for patiently pointing out (again) what they /actually/ covered, thereby setting me straight. I will try to read a bit more carefully, next time. =:^\ -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
