A: how long did it take? You've got 33 object files there, so presumably 33 source files; if each takes 10 seconds to compile then that's 330 seconds, i.e. 5.5 min. That's not particularly slow. That's why we have makefiles instead of batch files; a small code update will only result in the affected files being recompiled rather than the whole lot being done as would be the case if you used a batch file instead.
What hardware are you using? Maybe if you have a slow computer this will affect the time it takes.
B: no idea, probably this is a compile time option. You may need to specify a define to get that info up.
C: No, gcc is at least as good as many commercial compilers. Probably you wouldn't notice any difference if you switched to, say, Visual Studio Team Edition, at about £2500 iirc. The problem is likely due to (a) slow hardware and/or (b) unrealistically high expectations. How fast do you think this program should have built and what is that based on? How many lines of code are there in each C file and are you comparing this large application with trivial "hello world" examples that build in about a nanosecond? Compiling code is a major task for a computer and is why developers are usually equipped with the latest and greatest hardware.
Also if build times are a problem for you and there is a compiled version already available, why not just use that one?