Return to BSD News archive
Newsgroups: comp.os.386bsd.misc Path: sserve!newshost.anu.edu.au!munnari.oz.au!yoyo.aarnet.edu.au!news.adelaide.edu.au!news.cs.su.oz.au!harbinger.cc.monash.edu.au!yeshua.marcam.com!MathWorks.Com!europa.eng.gtefsd.com!howland.reston.ans.net!pipex!uknet!cf-cm!paul From: paul@myrddin.isl.cf.ac.uk (9) Subject: Re: Shared Library Status ? Message-ID: <1994Mar8.120309.1230@cm.cf.ac.uk> Sender: news@cm.cf.ac.uk (Network News System) Organization: Intelligent Systems Lab, ELSYM, University of Wales, Cardiff References: <hastyCM9r6q.KFB@netcom.com> <CMApnr.3rB@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> <2lglh5$otn@u.cc.utah.edu> Date: Tue, 8 Mar 1994 12:03:07 +0000 Lines: 28 In article <2lglh5$otn@u.cc.utah.edu> terry@cs.weber.edu (Terry Lambert) writes: >In article <CMApnr.3rB@cogsci.ed.ac.uk> richard@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Richard Tobin) writes: >>In article <hastyCM9r6q.KFB@netcom.com> hasty@netcom.com (Amancio Hasty Jr) writes: >[ ... 11 minute kernel compile on old system, 22 minutes on NetBSD with > shared libraries ... ] >>Well, there are rather a lot of variables there! For example, you've >>probably switched from gcc1 to gcc2. > >FreeBSD-current (and 1.1-Beta) is gcc2. > >>Building the kernel is a fairly bad case for shared libraries - lots of >>small(ish) compilations, each with several processes being started. > >I am [mostly] running FreeBSD-current. > >My kernel compile takes four minutes for the generic config. For the >full sources from scratch without the "ports" stuff, I spend right >around 3 hours. > What hardware is this? It's a hell of a lot faster than mine. Takes about 20 mins for me to compile a kernel and about 8 hrs for the whole tree. I agree this is a very poor benchmark but with differences that large it's interesting to see what hardware can do what. I've got a pretty slow machine, 33Mhz 486 ISA with 16M ram but the real bottleneck is the IDE drive which is sucking up cpu cycles doing its DMA.