Em 10-02-2016 00:52, Ken Moffat escreveu: > After last month's discussions on lfs-dev about building with gold, I > thought I would give it a go. I'll CC this to blfs-dev and > blfs-support : if you reply, please consider which list is > appropriate. > > For those who have not encountered it, gold is a different linker, > developed by google and supposedly much faster. I was initially > dubious - when I last saw comments about it (a long while ago) I > recall that the linux kernel failed to link, perhaps only for some > .config options, and I anticipated problems in BLFS. > > I built using LFS-svn from the 2nd of this month, and BLFS from the > 4th - my normal desktop, plus all of TeX and most of kde5. > > This was with GNU gold (GNU Binutils 2.26.20160125) 1.11 - > for LFS I had to add bison to the end of chapter five and pass > --enable-gold --enable-plugins > to chapter six binutils. I managed to get a vast amount of output on > my screen while running the tests (instead of to my test log), but > all that my log shows for the gold summary is: > ================== > All 3 tests passed > ================== > > When I initially built gold on a completed system, I think there > were about 225 other tests before or after that, so I need to fix my > script (2>>&1 in the wrong place!). > > I did not attempt to use gold until chapter 6 had completed (so, my > first package was the linux kernel) and I hacked up an ld symlink at > /usr/bin/gold/ld to avoid major changes to my scripts (i.e. just > alter the PATH in my main scripts - this also simplifies trying to > test if a build failure is because of gold: just drop that part of > the PATH). > > In practice, my problems were few. A list of the packages I built > is at > http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/~ken/gold-tests/packages-built-with-gold-Feb-2016 > and of those only libglade [ patch now in patches ], firefox (! : > it told me to use --disable-elf-hack > https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=1246416) and > gtkimageview-1.6.4 (for ufraw : fixed with a sed which is in my > lsit). > > Please note that I did not attempt to compare build times with gold > and regular old ld. This was just a test to estimate how many > packages will need fixes, and the number looks manageable. > I also have no idea whether gold can be used when building chapter > five.
Just to confirm what you wrote in a previous mail: <https://lists.webkit.org/pipermail/webkit-gtk/2015-February/002253.html> > * Switching from ld.bfd to *ld.gold* will speed things up > dramatically if you're doing a debug build (with -g). I don't > remember how much faster it is for non-debug builds, but I would > guess the difference is significant. > * Switching from GCC 4.8 to Clang 3.4 made non-debug builds go ~15% > faster for me. This probably depends a lot on the specific compiler > version, though. Upgrading from Fedora 20 (with GCC 4.8) to Fedora 21 > (GCC 4.9) caused my build time to increase by >20%, which was sad. -- []s, Fernando, aka SÃsifo -- http://lists.linuxfromscratch.org/listinfo/blfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html Unsubscribe: See the above information page
