[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: should GNU install call matchpathcon by default?

From: Ralf Wildenhues
Subject: Re: should GNU install call matchpathcon by default?
Date: Mon, 26 May 2008 19:55:04 +0200
User-agent: Mutt/1.5.17+20080114 (2008-01-14)


* Jim Meyering wrote on Wed, May 21, 2008 at 04:26:41PM CEST:
> Ondrej Vasik <address@hidden> wrote:
> > to reduce performance impact would be to patch automake to install multiple
> > files in one directory at once or something like that - to reduce 
> > performance
> > impact of the ifdefed code on installation of big portions of files.
> That will help, and part of it is already done in upstream automake:
> but that doesn't yet help when installing e.g., coreutils' 100 programs,
> since the existing code still loops, installing each individually.
> In a way, it has to, because with --program-transform-name, it may
> have to rename each one.


> However, automake *can* (and probably will, now that I've proposed it)
> special-case the very common situation in which there is no
> --program-transform-name and $(EXEEXT) is empty.  Maybe someone
> will propose a patch to do that.  A 30x performance improvement is
> worth a small compromise for the common case.

Heh, I've been thinking about special-casing the common case even before
you've proposed it, but thanks anyway!  ;-)

It's more that I wanted to wait at least until we have the machinery in
place for non-transformed manpages (which it is now), so special-casing
can be done for both at the same time.  Since you've beaten me now with
a patch, I'll instead look at it now.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]