OSLib and ELF

[Stewart Brodie]

Tony van der Hoff <tony at vanderhoff.org> wrote:

> On 13 Apr at 0:08 Stewart Brodie <stewart at metahusky.net> wrote in message
> <gemini.jgeqxu00br7vb03qs.stewart at metahusky.net>
> 
> > John Tytgat <John.Tytgat at aaug.net> wrote:
> > 
> > > In message <gemini.jgeev7002fu6z03qs.stewart at metahusky.net>
> > >           Stewart Brodie <stewart at metahusky.net> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > > The -j make option.  Basically doing more than one build step at
> > > > > the same time.  Keeping multicore/cpu happy.  It roughly cuts
> > > > > build times in 2 or 3.
> > > > 
> > > > Does that *really* matter all that much?  Last time I cross-compiled
> > > > OSLib, it only took 45 seconds or so for a full build from clean
> > > > but, admittedly that was probably 7-8 years ago, but I can't believe
> > > > that it's got slower in the meantime, has it?
> > > 
> > > Actually on my machine (AMD 64 X2 4400+ based):
> > > 
> > > real    4m5.554s user    3m1.671s sys     0m53.119s
> > 
> > How bizarre.  I remember being shocked that it had built so quickly - I
> > actually assumed that it hadn't built correctly at first, but it had.  I
> > suppose it could have been because I was able to use objasm to assemble
> > it, and I'm assume that you're not using it.
> > 
> Stewart, as I recall, you never built the entire project, instead only
> building the library binary, and the (C?) headers. The thing that takes
> the time is building the stronghelp manuals. I think the test suite was
> after your time, and I'm sure you didn't build the distribution
> directories.
> 
> That would certainly account for the difference in timings.

Ah, that explains it.


> > > > I don't understand why you can't use the same Makefiles for
> > > > cross-compiling and native compiling - is it not just a case of a
> > > > different CC and LIB macros?
> > > 
> > > Exactly, that's where I want to go.
> > > 
> > > > I thought I'd submitted all those changes to the project when I did
> > > > them, which would be at least 7-8 years ago now.  Perhaps it was
> > > > just the patches that meant you could compile up defmod itself for
> > > > Linux or Solaris. Sorry, if that's so - I no longer have any RISC OS
> > > > source trees :-/
> > > 
> > > I can't answer that.  Your defmod changes are certainly there,
> > 
> > It's a shame.  Looks like that work was lost then :-(
> > 
> I incorporated everything you submitted, which in fact led to DefMod2.
> Your makefile changes were subsumed into the current GNU makefiles. I'm
> not aware of any work being lost, and I'm pretty certain you gave me
> everything you had.

Sorry, I think you may have got the wrong end of the stick there - I'm
saying that *I* forgot to make them available outside of Pace, not that they
got lost at your end.

-- 
Stewart Brodie