Our bloat problem [LWN.net]

Our bloat problem

Posted Aug 4, 2005 2:29 UTC (Thu) by omez (guest, #6904)
In reply to: Our bloat problem by jg
Parent article: Our bloat problem

"...ld is referencing even libraries that aren't actually used, and the build systems typically are referencing all the libraries when linking."

Michael Meeks wrote about some of his Open Office and toolchain related work: http://go-oo.org/~michael/OOoStartup.pdf

(Log in to post comments)

Our bloat problem

Posted Aug 4, 2005 6:39 UTC (Thu) by emj (guest, #14307) [Link]

Recuding relocations at startup? I'm not sure it will help alot, well it's a start but... He says However doing this will chop ~1 second off the warm-start time of OO.o, and substantially improve both Mozilla and KDE startup performance, now this is very nice it goes down from 6s to 5s startup on my machine.

But cold startup takes 23s, and this is what mater to me and my fellow users. The time when you feel OO.o startup time the most is when you have to wait for the computer to boot and then OO.o to start, it seems like forever.

What can you do about this, is it just ineffienct loading of 21MB of OO.o process.

It takes 46s to cold start WinME (from bios) and 6s to to start Word (while still loading the OS). And then there's no read from the disk at all..

OO,o starts

Posted Aug 4, 2005 7:52 UTC (Thu) by eru (subscriber, #2753) [Link]

The time when you feel OO.o startup time the most is when you have to wait for the computer to boot and then OO.o to start, it seems like forever.

Indeed. I recently found that if I want to just view a single PowerPoint file on Linux, it is about 10x faster to start wine + Microsoft's PowerPoint viewer, than to start OO.o to view the file. Sad.