From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Johannes Schindelin Subject: Re: Performance issue of 'git branch' Date: Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:23:58 +0200 (CEST) Message-ID: References: <20090723195548.GA28494@Pilar.aei.mpg.de> <20090724234648.GA4616@Pilar.aei.mpg.de> <20090725004122.GA28477@Pilar.aei.mpg.de> <20090725215739.d074e947.tihirvon@gmail.com> <20090725203130.GB1640@glandium.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Cc: Mike Hommey , Timo Hirvonen , git@vger.kernel.org, "Carlos R. Mafra" , Junio C Hamano To: Linus Torvalds X-From: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Sun Jul 26 01:24:06 2009 Return-path: Envelope-to: gcvg-git-2@gmane.org Received: from vger.kernel.org ([209.132.176.167]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1MUqaz-0002hw-Rc for gcvg-git-2@gmane.org; Sun, 26 Jul 2009 01:24:06 +0200 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1752524AbZGYXX7 (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:23:59 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1752323AbZGYXX6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:23:58 -0400 Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]:43009 "HELO mail.gmx.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1752213AbZGYXX6 (ORCPT ); Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:23:58 -0400 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 25 Jul 2009 23:23:55 -0000 Received: from pacific.mpi-cbg.de (EHLO pacific.mpi-cbg.de) [141.5.10.38] by mail.gmx.net (mp010) with SMTP; 26 Jul 2009 01:23:55 +0200 X-Authenticated: #1490710 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18qA7gmpucqD4qjgjvlclzynv8tCba4Of+bWekLuC 0fiHcS32LqyEOx X-X-Sender: schindelin@pacific.mpi-cbg.de In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Alpine 1.00 (DEB 882 2007-12-20) X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-FuHaFi: 0.65 Sender: git-owner@vger.kernel.org Precedence: bulk List-ID: X-Mailing-List: git@vger.kernel.org Archived-At: Hi, On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: > On Sat, 25 Jul 2009, Linus Torvalds wrote: > > > > The fact that apparently sometimes it's less bloated than other times > > doesn't really change anything fundamental, does it? > > Btw, does anybody know how/why libdl seems to get linked in too? > > We're not doing -ldl, and I'm not seeing any need for it, but it's > definitely there on fedora, at least. > > It seems to come from libcrypto. I can get rid of it with NO_OPENSSL, and > that cuts down on the number of system calls in my startup by 16 (getting > rid of both libcrypto and libdl). I wonder if there is some way to get the > optimized openssl sha1 routines _without_ that silly ldl thing. OpenSSL allows for so-called engines implementing certain algorithms. These engines are dynamic libraries, loaded via dlopen(). Ciao, Dscho