public inbox for discuss@lists.illumos.org (since 2011-08)
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Bob Friesenhahn <bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us>
To: illumos-discuss <discuss@lists.illumos.org>
Subject: Re: [discuss] Binary compatibility between Illumos distributions
Date: Mon, 30 Sep 2024 08:01:04 -0500 (CDT)	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <alpine.GSO.2.20.2409300741470.4722@scrappy.simplesystems.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <17276407990.2Db2CA.652495@composer.illumos.topicbox.com>

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1964 bytes --]

On Sun, 29 Sep 2024, Sad Clouds wrote:

> Over the years I got frustrated with autoconf.
>
> It is quite slow, especially on old machines like Sun Ultra 10. It 
> could take several minutes to run autoconf scripts and then several 
> seconds to compile some small open source package. If you are 
> building large number of packages from something like pkgsrc, the 
> issue is magnified significantly. Even on fast machines with many 
> CPUs, autoconf inhibits parallelization, as it runs its tests 
> sequentially and then many packages repeat the same tests over and 
> over again, it is really bonkers. The issues are quite noticeable 
> when bulk building many packages. 

The Sun Ultra 10 is indeed very old.  But my early experiences with 
Autoconf started in 1993 on a SPARCclassic "server" (running Solaris 
2.1), which is much slower than that. :-)

In order to speed autoconf scripts for tests which always produce the 
same answer, one can create a 'config.site' script with cached 
results, and refer to it with the CONFIG_SITE environment variable. 
If you are bulk-building many packages using similar configuration 
options, this will result in a huge speed-up.

A good thing about autoconf is that it almost always produces the 
correct answer, and packages depending on autoconf+automake+libtool 
are extremely consistent and predictable.  I have found that projects 
based on CMake are not nearly as consistent and predictable.

Bob
-- 
Bob Friesenhahn
bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us, http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/
GraphicsMagick Maintainer,    http://www.GraphicsMagick.org/
Public Key,     http://www.simplesystems.org/users/bfriesen/public-key.txt
------------------------------------------
illumos: illumos-discuss
Permalink: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/Te614dba5c9d949ba-M9e9aa7d627e7d2c4235e91b0
Delivery options: https://illumos.topicbox.com/groups/discuss/subscription

  reply	other threads:[~2024-09-30 13:03 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 7+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2024-09-29  7:26 Sad Clouds
2024-09-29 18:25 ` Peter Tribble
2024-09-29 19:16   ` Sad Clouds
2024-09-29 19:20     ` Joshua M. Clulow via illumos-discuss
2024-09-29 20:13       ` Sad Clouds
2024-09-30 13:01         ` Bob Friesenhahn [this message]
2024-09-30 16:16           ` Sad Clouds

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=alpine.GSO.2.20.2409300741470.4722@scrappy.simplesystems.org \
    --to=bfriesen@simple.dallas.tx.us \
    --cc=discuss@lists.illumos.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).