Hi,
make-3.79.1, built on a recent glibc snapshot, links with the shared
library librt, but doesn't any symbol from this library! Of course this
costs startup time.
The reason is that the function file_timestamp_now() in file.c uses
clock_gettime, but that block depends on
if
Hi,
make-3.79.1, built on a recent glibc snapshot, links with the shared
library libutil, but doesn't any symbol from this library! Of course
this costs startup time.
The reason is the AC_FUNC_GETLOADAVG macro. It checks for getloadavg
in -lutil. Now glibc-2.2 has getloadavg in libc, but it
%% Bruno Haible [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
bh make-3.79.1, built on a recent glibc snapshot, links with the shared
bh library librt, but doesn't any symbol from this library! Of course this
bh costs startup time.
bh The reason is that the function file_timestamp_now() in file.c uses
bh
| Hi,
|
| make-3.79.1, built on a recent glibc snapshot, links with the shared
| library libutil, but doesn't any symbol from this library! Of course
| this costs startup time.
|
| The reason is the AC_FUNC_GETLOADAVG macro. It checks for getloadavg
| in -lutil. Now glibc-2.2 has getloadavg in
Paul D. Smith writes:
Seems like any decent compiler would omit this code! Since Linux is
using GCC, I would double-expect that. Maybe it only happens when you
build with optimization on?
No compiler is required to omit "if (0)" code, and gcc indeed doesn't
omit it if -O is not given.
%% Bruno Haible [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
bh Paul D. Smith writes:
Seems like any decent compiler would omit this code! Since Linux is
using GCC, I would double-expect that. Maybe it only happens when you
build with optimization on?
bh No compiler is required to omit "if (0)"
Paul D. Smith writes:
it would be interesting to see if make included a reference to
libutil.so if compiled with -O.
Yes, it did. I verified using "ldd ./make" that it had a reference to
libutil.so before my patch, and that with my patch, the reference was
gone.
Bruno
