Re: [gentoo-dev] glibc & binutils -aware hackers wanted for questions ;)

["Spider (D.m.D. Lj.)" <spider@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 906 bytes --]

On Mon, 2005-11-28 at 17:56 -0800, Bret Towe wrote:

> >
> > So, now I'm just asking for comments and/or discussion here..  would it
> > be worth the time spent on this?
> > http://sourceware.org/ml/binutils/2005-10/msg00436.html
> 
> looks interesting personally id like to see how it acts on kde also
> and some small c++ apps to see if it hurts them any
> a single benchmark for a change that would affect so much seems
> a bit silly to me

Yeah, but before I start to spend too much time hacking on this, I'd
want to have a suggested metric and performance test setup here. If
anyone has ideas for a decent test, I'd be happy.

As for KDE, I think modern Gnome would benefit as well, since it has
been heavily refactioned into libraries these days. 

//Spider
-- 
begin  .signature
Tortured users / Laughing in pain
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end


[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]