Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)" <spider@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc & binutils -aware hackers wanted for questions ;)
Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2005 02:12:45
Message-Id: 1133230210.4229.5.camel@Darkmere.darkmere
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc & binutils -aware hackers wanted for questions ;) by Bret Towe
1 On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:56 -0800, Bret Towe wrote:
2
3 > >
4 > > So, now I'm just asking for comments and/or discussion here.. would it
5 > > be worth the time spent on this?
6 > > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-10/msg00436.html
7 >
8 > looks interesting personally id like to see how it acts on kde also
9 > and some small c++ apps to see if it hurts them any
10 > a single benchmark for a change that would affect so much seems
11 > a bit silly to me
12
13 Yeah, but before I start to spend too much time hacking on this, I'd
14 want to have a suggested metric and performance test setup here. If
15 anyone has ideas for a decent test, I'd be happy.
16
17 As for KDE, I think modern Gnome would benefit as well, since it has
18 been heavily refactioned into libraries these days.
19
20 //Spider
21 --
22 begin .signature
23 Tortured users / Laughing in pain
24 See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
25 end

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc & binutils -aware hackers wanted for questions ;) Bret Towe <magnade@×××××.com>