| 1 |
"Mark Knecht" <markknecht@×××××.com> posted |
| 2 |
5bdc1c8b0609151106u52bcf8f6s3c98497cf41bc2e8@××××××××××.com, excerpted |
| 3 |
below, on Fri, 15 Sep 2006 11:06:47 -0700: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> On 9/14/06, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Hi, |
| 7 |
>> I'm just curious whether anyone besides me is noticing their |
| 8 |
>> machine feeling somewhat sluggish since doing the gcc-4.1 upgrade? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I noticed this morning that MythTV's frontend program is often using |
| 11 |
> >90% CPU when viewed in top. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> It never used more than 10% before the upgrade to gcc-4. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Clearly this is at least part of the problem here. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Indeed, that would explain your observations. Perhaps either the |
| 18 |
front-end or some library it loads is one of the few programs that just |
| 19 |
doesn't work quite right with gcc-4.1 yet. Good detective work! |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
So it would appear you have to try recompiling it with gcc-3.x again, and |
| 22 |
see if that eliminates the problem. If not, you'll have to check its |
| 23 |
dependency tree and try recompiling it. Get that 90% off the CPU and |
| 24 |
maybe you'll see the better general efficiency of gcc-4.1, regardless of |
| 25 |
whether you try my cflags or not. In fact, that's what I'd recommend you |
| 26 |
do, before trying my cflags. You'd then have a better base on which to |
| 27 |
measure whether my cflags made a difference for you or not, as opposed to |
| 28 |
what gcc-4.1.x itself did. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 32 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 33 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
-- |
| 36 |
gentoo-amd64@g.o mailing list |
Archives