Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship

Installation:
Gentoo Handbook
Installation Docs

Documentation:
Home
Listing
About Gentoo
Philosophy
Social Contract

Resources:
Bug Tracker
Developer List
Discussion Forums
Gentoo BitTorrents
Gentoo Linux Enhancement Proposals
IRC Channels
Mailing Lists
Mirrors
Name and Logo Guidelines
Online Package Database
Security Announcements
Staffing Needs
Supporting Vendors
View our CVS

Graphics:
Logos and themes
Icons
ScreenShots

Miscellaneous Resources:
Gentoo Linux Store
Gentoo-hosted projects
IBM dW/Intel article archive




List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
Subject: Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS
Date: Sat, 31 May 2008 21:24:34 +0200
[Answering to some random message in this long thread.]

>>>>> On Sat, 31 May 2008, Brian Harring wrote:

> So... folks have pointed out a benefit to using --as-needed.
> The benefit itself doesn't seem particularly in dispute, analyze
> the fallout from it- if the best that is offered is "the spec says
> otherwise", screw the spec frankly- a .01% breakage w/ 99.99% pkgs
> getting a positive gain is a strong argument for doing exemptions
> where needed.

Speaking about statistics: Either I have missed it, or so far nobody
has presented any solid numbers showing what the benefit of
--as-needed in terms of memory usage or program startup time is.

Could someone please show this comparison for some common programs?

I've just done this for Emacs (22.2-r2), virtual set size directly
after startup is 25280 and 25276 kB, for Emacs built without and with
--as-needed, respectively (resident set size is 14412 and 14396 kB).
I don't see any difference in startup time.

But maybe Emacs is an uncommon application, or I am looking for the
wrong things? Could one of the experts please shed some light on this?

Ulrich
-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list


Replies:
Re: Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS
-- Rémi Cardona
Re: Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS
-- Mike Auty
References:
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Donnie Berkholz
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Luca Barbato
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Luca Barbato
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Luca Barbato
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Luca Barbato
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
-- Brian Harring
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS (Was: RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?)
Next by thread:
Re: Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS
Previous by date:
Re: packages up for grabs
Next by date:
Re: Re: RFC: --as-needed to default LDFLAGS


Updated Jun 17, 2009

Donate to support our development efforts.

Gentoo Centric Hosting: vr.org

VR Hosted

Tek Alchemy

Tek Alchemy

SevenL.net

SevenL.net

php|architect

php|architect

Copyright 2001-2007 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Email www@gentoo.org.