Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Wed, 17 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Michael Van Canneyt wrote

 You didn't even file an official request in the bugtracker ?


Because I tried already and because I know the (rejected) answer.


Where is this bugreport ?


I was talking about earlier other requests.


Each case is always judged separately.


But now, if you think that the request has a little chance to be considered,
I will sent a bugreport with great pleasure,


To the best of my knowledge, we only refuse requests if there is (for us) a 
good reason.

Until now, I see no reason why we would refuse your request ?
I do still think that we need to investigate it somewhat more thoroughly.

So if you submit a request, you actually improve the probability it gets
looked at and subsequently added...

If you could add a sample library project with some resources (they need not
necessarily be forms), then this would help us investigate the case.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote
>>>  You didn't even file an official request in the bugtracker ?
>>
>> Because I tried already and because I know the (rejected) answer.
> 
> Where is this bugreport ?

I was talking about earlier other requests.

But now, if you think that the request has a little chance to be considered,
I will sent a bugreport with great pleasure, 

Fre;D




-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728658.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Wed, 17 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


But, IMHO, if fpc uses a external linker, it is also part of the compilation
process. And each feature of the linker should be analyzed.


We are agreed on that.


Michael Van Canneyt wrote

 You didn't even file an official request in the bugtracker ?


Because I tried already and because I know the (rejected) answer.


Where is this bugreport ?

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote
> On Wed, 17 May 2017, fredvs wrote:
> 
>> Hello.
>>
>> OK, I see that fpc team is afraid to change something that mom-Delphi did
>> not do.
> 
> This is simply not correct and a *very* unfair statement on your part.
> Mails like this will really not get you anywhere.

Yes, I now. I know also that if you do not speak hot, people does not
listen.
By the way, I sent advices about size of fpc libraries more than 10 years
ago.
A lot of "work in progress" as answers but nothing change.

A other thing that I discover: it is extremely sensible to talk about
linkers.
In FreeBSD forum, I was insulted because I reveal that their linker (GNU ld)
was not compatible with FreeBSD multi-arch design.

But, IMHO, if fpc uses a external linker, it is also part of the compilation
process.
And each feature of the linker should be analyzed.


Michael Van Canneyt wrote
>  You didn't even file an official request in the bugtracker ?

Because I tried already and because I know the (rejected) answer. 


Michael Van Canneyt wrote
> You didn't even test the resources thing. It means we will need to test
> this. 
>This takes time, and the issue is not considered very important, so
> this time 
>is indeed not spent right away. 

Of course I tested it, why do you write this ?


Michael Van Canneyt wrote
> With this mail, you're simply behaving like a small girl that didn't get
> her 
> ice cream right away... 

Ha, so you do not know me.
If I do not get my ice cream, I am much more unbearable.

Fre;D
 






-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728656.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Wed, 17 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Hello.

OK, I see that fpc team is afraid to change something that mom-Delphi did
not do.


This is simply not correct and a *very* unfair statement on your part.
Mails like this will really not get you anywhere.

1. You didn't even file an official request in the bugtracker ?

2. Where did we say we would not do this ? We're just careful, since the
effect is not known.

3. You didn't even test the resources thing. It means we will need to test this.
  This takes time, and the issue is not considered very important, so this time
  is indeed not spent right away.

4. Delphi doesn't use GNU ld, so this comparison is totally without basis.

With this mail, you're simply behaving like a small girl that didn't get her 
ice cream right away...


Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Maciej Izak]

2017-05-17 13:32 GMT+02:00 fredvs :

>
> OK, I see that fpc team is afraid to change something that mom-Delphi did
> not do.


You don't know that. Lack of bug report / feature request on mantis, means
that the feature request doesn't exist in any formal way. Sometimes is good
to have reported thing like this on bugtracker for documentation purposes
(even if finally will be rejected).

-- 
Best regards,
Maciej Izak
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Hello.

OK, I see that fpc team is afraid to change something that mom-Delphi did
not do.

So, to resume, for people who wants to smartlink their libraries, you may
use this command:

*fpc -k--gc-sections my_smartlinked_library.pas*

Fre;D





-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728647.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[noreply]

On 2017-05-16 09:20, fredvs wrote:

Michael Van Canneyt wrote

On Tue, 16 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Michael Van Canneyt wrote

What can be misunderstood about adding --gc-sections to the linker
options if -XX is used on the command-line ?


Ha, the way you present it seems to show that you did understand it 
;-)


OK, maybe is it time to add a feature request...


Before filing a request, you can already check yourself what happens 
with

form data if you compile a lazarus form into the library.

Michael.


Huh, with all the respect that I have for LCL, I was never able to 
compile a

Lazarus form into library


Hrm... I think way back I was able to compile a lcl form into a library, 
as a plugin for lazarusrb, but, had issues with showmessage requiring 
two mouse clicks instead of one click to close it, or some strange 
behaviors..


But it was such a long time ago that I forgot. Some strange message loop 
issues AFAIR

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[noreply]

On 2017-05-16 03:15, fredvs wrote:

noreply wrote

On 2017-05-15 04:26, fredvs wrote:

After lot of fight, there is a solution: using -*-gc-sections*.

And the question was :

/Why FPC does not provide --gc-sections to the linker with the -XX
paramer
for libraries ? (Bug ?) /



Hopefully that's all there is to it, but how do you know that this
doesn't just work for your current code and is not reliable for all
situations?

If that's all there is too it, that's cool! But maybe fpc left it out
for a reason: like it only works in some test cases of libraries, but
not all test cases?
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -



fpc-pascal@.freepascal



http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections as
parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to compile 
a

library.

Fre;D


Okay hold on. All situations.
Either you are a serious Edsgar Dijkstra fan, and you have proven it to 
be correct (unlikely) or you have all the test cases of the entire 
universe and are a unit testing nutcase..
All the chess board peices and positions on the game board have all been 
tested in all situations...

No..

But, seriously... if it works in many many many situations I guess that 
is "good enough"

:-)
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Tue, 16 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Michael Van Canneyt wrote

On Tue, 16 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Michael Van Canneyt wrote
What can be misunderstood about adding --gc-sections to the linker 
options if -XX is used on the command-line ?


Ha, the way you present it seems to show that you did understand it ;-)

OK, maybe is it time to add a feature request...


Before filing a request, you can already check yourself what happens with
form data if you compile a lazarus form into the library.

Michael.


Huh, with all the respect that I have for LCL, I was never able to compile a
Lazarus form into library (even without --gc-sections or -XX) .
On the other side, with forms from fpGUI or MSEgui, no form data loosed
while compiling forms into library with --gc-sections.


As far as I know, they don't use FPC resources for this ?



PS: Re-huh, the libraries that I compile do not store form-data (even no
data at all).


Possibly, but this is something that must be checked before implementing
such an option...

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Marco van de Voort wrote
> In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
>> > Does it work for all situations?  I remember a bug for the rust
>> compiler
>> > that broke libraries when --gc-sections was used, because it removed
>> the
>> > metadata that rust needed to load the library.  One of the fpc devs can
>> > probably say whether fpc may have a similar problem.
>> 
>> You risk losing e.g. resources. 
>> This is typically what needs to be investigated.
> 
> That also goes for the main application. Such sections should be marked
> with
> KEEP() in the linker script.
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  

> fpc-pascal@.freepascal

> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Yes and it is valable too for programs compiled with -XX.

Fre;D



-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728617.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote
> On Tue, 16 May 2017, fredvs wrote:
> 
>> Michael Van Canneyt wrote
>>> What can be misunderstood about adding --gc-sections to the linker 
>>> options if -XX is used on the command-line ?
>>
>> Ha, the way you present it seems to show that you did understand it ;-)
>>
>> OK, maybe is it time to add a feature request...
> 
> Before filing a request, you can already check yourself what happens with
> form data if you compile a lazarus form into the library.
> 
> Michael.

Huh, with all the respect that I have for LCL, I was never able to compile a
Lazarus form into library (even without --gc-sections or -XX) .
On the other side, with forms from fpGUI or MSEgui, no form data loosed
while compiling forms into library with --gc-sections.

PS: Re-huh, the libraries that I compile do not store form-data (even no
data at all).

Fre;D






-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728616.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Tue, 16 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Michael Van Canneyt wrote
What can be misunderstood about adding --gc-sections to the linker 
options if -XX is used on the command-line ?


Ha, the way you present it seems to show that you did understand it ;-)

OK, maybe is it time to add a feature request...


Before filing a request, you can already check yourself what happens with
form data if you compile a lazarus form into the library.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Marco van de Voort]

In our previous episode, Michael Van Canneyt said:
> > Does it work for all situations?  I remember a bug for the rust compiler
> > that broke libraries when --gc-sections was used, because it removed the
> > metadata that rust needed to load the library.  One of the fpc devs can
> > probably say whether fpc may have a similar problem.
> 
> You risk losing e.g. resources. 
> This is typically what needs to be investigated.

That also goes for the main application. Such sections should be marked with
KEEP() in the linker script.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote
> What can be misunderstood about adding --gc-sections to the linker 
> options if -XX is used on the command-line ?

Ha, the way you present it seems to show that you did understand it ;-)

OK, maybe is it time to add a feature request...

Fre;D 




-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728609.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Marco van de Voort]

In our previous episode, fredvs said:
> Nobody uses fpc library here ?

Yes, but I don't care about size unless it is outrageous.
 
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Tue, 16 May 2017, Henry Vermaak wrote:


On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 01:15:34AM -0700, fredvs wrote:

It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections
as parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to
compile a library.


Does it work for all situations?  I remember a bug for the rust compiler
that broke libraries when --gc-sections was used, because it removed the
metadata that rust needed to load the library.  One of the fpc devs can
probably say whether fpc may have a similar problem.


You risk losing e.g. resources. 
This is typically what needs to be investigated.


Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Henry Vermaak]

On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 01:15:34AM -0700, fredvs wrote:
> It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections
> as parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to
> compile a library.

Does it work for all situations?  I remember a bug for the rust compiler
that broke libraries when --gc-sections was used, because it removed the
metadata that rust needed to load the library.  One of the fpc devs can
probably say whether fpc may have a similar problem.

I know with gcc you will need -ffunction-sections and -fdata-sections if
you want --gc-sections to do anything, and there are warnings attached
to those (see the gcc man page).

Henry
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Tue, 16 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


Maciej Izak wrote

2017-05-16 10:15 GMT+02:00 fredvs 



fiens@



:


It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections as
parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to compile a
library.



for features requests please use https://bugs.freepascal.org .

--
Best regards,
Maciej Izak

___
fpc-pascal maillist  - 



fpc-pascal@.freepascal



http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Thanks but before to ask for that (essential) feature: ---> advices, ideas,
warnings are welcome.

Also, as you can see, it is important to be sure that the request is
perfectly understood (and, sorry, but I have lot of doubt about this).


And why is that ?

What can be misunderstood about adding --gc-sections to the linker 
options if -XX is used on the command-line ?


Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Maciej Izak wrote
> 2017-05-16 10:15 GMT+02:00 fredvs 

> fiens@

> :
> 
>> It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections as
>> parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to compile a
>> library.
>>
> 
> for features requests please use https://bugs.freepascal.org .
> 
> -- 
> Best regards,
> Maciej Izak
> 
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  

> fpc-pascal@.freepascal

> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Thanks but before to ask for that (essential) feature: ---> advices, ideas,
warnings are welcome.

Also, as you can see, it is important to be sure that the request is
perfectly understood (and, sorry, but I have lot of doubt about this).

Fre;D

Fre;D





-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728604.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Maciej Izak]

2017-05-16 10:15 GMT+02:00 fredvs :

> It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections as
> parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to compile a
> library.
>

for features requests please use https://bugs.freepascal.org .

-- 
Best regards,
Maciej Izak
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

noreply wrote
> On 2017-05-15 04:26, fredvs wrote:
>> After lot of fight, there is a solution: using -*-gc-sections*.
>> 
>> And the question was :
>> 
>> /Why FPC does not provide --gc-sections to the linker with the -XX 
>> paramer
>> for libraries ? (Bug ?) /
> 
> 
> Hopefully that's all there is to it, but how do you know that this 
> doesn't just work for your current code and is not reliable for all 
> situations?
> 
> If that's all there is too it, that's cool! But maybe fpc left it out 
> for a reason: like it only works in some test cases of libraries, but 
> not all test cases?
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  

> fpc-pascal@.freepascal

> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

It works for all situations, so I propose that fpc add --gc-sections as
parameter for the linker if the user has used -XX parameter to compile a
library.

Fre;D



-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728600.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 15 May 2017, nore...@z505.com wrote:


On 2017-05-15 04:19, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:

If you want to compare today, you need to add the sizes of all the C
libraries that are loaded during execution of a C program with the
size of an FPC program.

I think you'll find that the sizes of FPC programs are not so different 
then.


Just check the size of libc:

ls /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.19.so -l



But if FPC also uses libc, in units like unix/linux/other .pp units, 
that means FPC is using C libs too..


Unless the user specifically includes it: It does not.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[noreply]

On 2017-05-15 04:26, fredvs wrote:

After lot of fight, there is a solution: using -*-gc-sections*.

And the question was :

/Why FPC does not provide --gc-sections to the linker with the -XX 
paramer

for libraries ? (Bug ?) /



Hopefully that's all there is to it, but how do you know that this 
doesn't just work for your current code and is not reliable for all 
situations?


If that's all there is too it, that's cool! But maybe fpc left it out 
for a reason: like it only works in some test cases of libraries, but 
not all test cases?

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[noreply]

On 2017-05-15 04:19, Michael Van Canneyt wrote:

If you want to compare today, you need to add the sizes of all the C
libraries that are loaded during execution of a C program with the
size of an FPC program.

I think you'll find that the sizes of FPC programs are not so different 
then.


Just check the size of libc:

ls /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.19.so -l



But if FPC also uses libc, in units like unix/linux/other .pp units, 
that means FPC is using C libs too..


This also was a claim made by Golang that it doesn't use C code so you 
are comparing apples to Women, but in fact, the women eat apples and 
oranges and See (C) too.

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 15 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal


Ha, news, finally.

Huh, did you read my post ?


I did.

I responded to the statement that fpc libraries are big and "unusable".


It talk about smartlinking of libraries that does not work.

After lot of fight, there is a solution: using -*-gc-sections*.

And the question was :

/Why FPC does not provide --gc-sections to the linker with the -XX paramer
for libraries ? (Bug ?) /


Not providing an option is not a bug. 
At best, providing this option is a feature request on your part.


Why it does not provide the option?
For the same reason that it doesn't strip binaries by default, I suppose.
Or maybe this option didn't exist when the FPC library support was
implemented ? Maybe there are even other reasons I am not aware of.

But even when you do the --gc-sections, your library will still be bigger than
corresponding C libraries for the reasons I outlined in my initial response.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Michael Van Canneyt wrote
> On Mon, 15 May 2017, fredvs wrote:
> 
>> fredvs wrote
>>> Hello.
>>> 
>>> Sorry to come back with this story but there are (good) news.
>>> 
>>> Using 
>> *
>>> --gc-sections
>> *
>>>  makes the library smartlinked.
>>> 
>>> So the question is:
>>> 
>>> Why FPC does not provide 
>> *
>>> --gc-sections
>> *
>>>  to the linker with the -XX paramer for libraries ? (Bug ?)
>>> 
>>> Fre;D
>>
>> Nobody uses fpc library here ?
>>
>> Strange that a (big) problem with maybe a solution does not interest
>> anybody.
> 
> There is no problem.
> 
>> The size of fpc libraries makes fpc-libraries not usable in a real world.
> 
> Why ?
> 
>>
>> I use some audio C libraries and a fpc library (that only link headers of
>> that C libraries) is 10 times bigger than the C libraries !
>>
>> And when a solution (or bug) is found ---> only silence as answer.
> 
> There is no bug. You are comparing apples with pears.
> 
> A C library in the traditional unix sense is a set of routines that
> requires
> other libraries to run - ultimately requiring libc.
> 
> A FPC library - due to it's windows origings heritage - is more like a
> static program. 
> It's almost 100% standalone, and does not require other libraries to
> function 
> (except the ones you explicitly link in). Inevitably, it is bigger.
> 
> Once dynamic packages are implemented, we can start comparing apples with
> apples, and pears with pears. a dynamic package is more like a C library
> in
> the unix sense. It makes sense to compare those.
> 
> If you want to compare today, you need to add the sizes of all the C
> libraries that are loaded during execution of a C program with the size 
> of an FPC program.
> 
> I think you'll find that the sizes of FPC programs are not so different
> then.
> 
> Just check the size of libc:
> 
> ls /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.19.so -l
> 
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1853216 Mar 21 20:24
> /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.19.so*
> 
> That is almost 2Mb that is linked in to every C library and program.
> 
> Michael.
> ___
> fpc-pascal maillist  -  

> fpc-pascal@.freepascal

> http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Ha, news, finally.

Huh, did you read my post ?

It talk about smartlinking of libraries that does not work.

After lot of fight, there is a solution: using -*-gc-sections*.

And the question was :

/Why FPC does not provide --gc-sections to the linker with the -XX paramer
for libraries ? (Bug ?) /

Fre;D





-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728558.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 15 May 2017, fredvs wrote:


fredvs wrote

Hello.

Sorry to come back with this story but there are (good) news.

Using 

*

--gc-sections

*

 makes the library smartlinked.

So the question is:

Why FPC does not provide 

*

--gc-sections

*

 to the linker with the -XX paramer for libraries ? (Bug ?)

Fre;D


Nobody uses fpc library here ?

Strange that a (big) problem with maybe a solution does not interest
anybody.


There is no problem.


The size of fpc libraries makes fpc-libraries not usable in a real world.


Why ?



I use some audio C libraries and a fpc library (that only link headers of
that C libraries) is 10 times bigger than the C libraries !

And when a solution (or bug) is found ---> only silence as answer.


There is no bug. You are comparing apples with pears.

A C library in the traditional unix sense is a set of routines that requires
other libraries to run - ultimately requiring libc.

A FPC library - due to it's windows origings heritage - is more like a static program. 
It's almost 100% standalone, and does not require other libraries to function 
(except the ones you explicitly link in). Inevitably, it is bigger.


Once dynamic packages are implemented, we can start comparing apples with
apples, and pears with pears. a dynamic package is more like a C library in
the unix sense. It makes sense to compare those.

If you want to compare today, you need to add the sizes of all the C
libraries that are loaded during execution of a C program with the size 
of an FPC program.


I think you'll find that the sizes of FPC programs are not so different then.

Just check the size of libc:

ls /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.19.so -l

-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1853216 Mar 21 20:24 /lib/x86_64-linux-gnu/libc-2.19.so*

That is almost 2Mb that is linked in to every C library and program.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

fredvs wrote
> Hello.
> 
> Sorry to come back with this story but there are (good) news.
> 
> Using 
*
> --gc-sections
*
>  makes the library smartlinked.
> 
> So the question is:
> 
> Why FPC does not provide 
*
> --gc-sections
*
>  to the linker with the -XX paramer for libraries ? (Bug ?)
> 
> Fre;D

Nobody uses fpc library here ?

Strange that a (big) problem with maybe a solution does not interest
anybody.

The size of fpc libraries makes fpc-libraries not usable in a real world.

I use some audio C libraries and a fpc library (that only link headers of
that C libraries) is 10 times bigger than the C libraries !

And when a solution (or bug) is found ---> only silence as answer.


Fre;D






-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728556.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

Hello.

Sorry to come back with this story but there are (good) news.

Using *--gc-sections* makes the library smartlinked.

So the question is:

Why FPC does not provide *--gc-sections* to the linker with the -XX paramer
for libraries ? (Bug ?)

Fre;D





-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5728548.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Lars]

>>> Sorry to insist on that, but the size of fp library is very too big
>>> vs
> other libraries (C for example).


Except in the case of KOL applications where many of my KOL Dll's/Exe's
were smaller than any C/C++ tool could ever create... But KOL is window's
specific mostly. Someone ported it, AFAIR, to linux using some gui
widget set, but I don't remember how far that got
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Sven Barth]

On 14.01.2017 17:18, fredvs wrote:
>>> Sorry to insist on that, but the size of fp library is very too big vs
> other libraries (C for example).
> 
>> The size of FPC libraries will always(*) be bigger then e.g. C ones,
>> because in FPC the RTL is statically linked into the program/library,
>> while C libraries link against the C runtime library.
> 
>> (*) Once dynamic runtime packages are supported this might change
>> though...
> 
>> Regards,
>> Sven
> 
> Hello.
> 
> This is a old topic but maybe there are some news...
> 
> Are dynamic runtime packages supported yet ?

No, they're still WIP.

Regards,
Sven

___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

>> Sorry to insist on that, but the size of fp library is very too big vs
other libraries (C for example).

> The size of FPC libraries will always(*) be bigger then e.g. C ones,
> because in FPC the RTL is statically linked into the program/library,
> while C libraries link against the C runtime library.

> (*) Once dynamic runtime packages are supported this might change
> though...

> Regards,
> Sven

Hello.

This is a old topic but maybe there are some news...

Are dynamic runtime packages supported yet ?

Thanks.

Fre;D





-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5727309.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[fredvs]

>> Sorry to insist on that, but the size of fp library is very too big vs
other libraries (C for example).

> The size of FPC libraries will always(*) be bigger then e.g. C ones,
> because in FPC the RTL is statically linked into the program/library,
> while C libraries link against the C runtime library.

> (*) Once dynamic runtime packages are supported this might change
> though...

> Regards,
> Sven

Hello.

This is a old topic but maybe there are some news...

Are dynamic runtime packages supported yet ?

Thanks.

Fre;D





-
Many thanks ;-)
--
View this message in context: 
http://free-pascal-general.1045716.n5.nabble.com/Size-of-program-vs-library-tp5718200p5727308.html
Sent from the Free Pascal - General mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, Fred van Stappen wrote:


 Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 18:30:57 +0100
 From: mich...@freepascal.org
 To: fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
 Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?



 On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, Fred van Stappen wrote:

  Hello.
 
  Here size of nude program and library compiled with fpc 2.7.1.
  Why is it a so big size-difference ?
 
  Compiled with = fpc 2.7.1 = linux 64
  Compiler parameters : -MObjFPC -Scghi -CX -Os1 -Xs -XX -vewnhi -fPIC

 I suspect PIC is to blame. This adds a lot of tables to your library.

 Michael.

Hum, when compile with or without -fPIC, it does not change anything,... i get 
exactly the same size...


If I am correct, the compiler will add the PIC by itself.
But someone of the compiler team should confirm this...

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Fred van Stappen]

 If I am correct, the compiler will add the PIC by itself.
 But someone of the compiler team should confirm this...
 
 Michael.

Yep, Michael, many thanks for answer.

Sorry to insist on that, but the size of fp library is very too big vs other 
libraries (C for example).

But there are huge advantages to use fp library : for example i never was able 
to create dynamic loaded libraries who load dynamically other libraries ( not 
possible with gcc, nor with M$ Visual Studio).

But with fp, it is possible...

So, if it could be possible to create fp library with a reasonable size, i 
think fp library is the future for all other libraries...

Many thanks.


  ___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Sven Barth]

Am 04.02.2014 13:35, schrieb Fred van Stappen:
Sorry to insist on that, but the size of fp library is very too big vs 
other libraries (C for example).
The size of FPC libraries will always(*) be bigger then e.g. C ones, 
because in FPC the RTL is statically linked into the program/library, 
while C libraries link against the C runtime library.


(*) Once dynamic runtime packages are supported this might change though...

Regards,
Sven
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Fred van Stappen]

(*) Once dynamic runtime packages are supported this might change
though...



Regards,

 Sven

  


Ok, thanks Sven, that will be the best...

But before the triumph of fp, i will do that universal audio open source 
library with fp too...

Many thanks for all of you, fp designers 

Fred
  ___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Michael Van Canneyt]

On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, Fred van Stappen wrote:


Hello.

Here size of nude program and library compiled with fpc 2.7.1.
Why is it a so big size-difference ?

Compiled with = fpc 2.7.1 = linux 64
Compiler parameters : -MObjFPC -Scghi -CX -Os1 -Xs -XX -vewnhi -fPIC


I suspect PIC is to blame. This adds a lot of tables to your library.

Michael.
___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal

Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?

[Fred van Stappen]

 Date: Mon, 3 Feb 2014 18:30:57 +0100
 From: mich...@freepascal.org
 To: fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
 Subject: Re: [fpc-pascal] Size of program vs library ?
 
 
 
 On Mon, 3 Feb 2014, Fred van Stappen wrote:
 
  Hello.
  
  Here size of nude program and library compiled with fpc 2.7.1.
  Why is it a so big size-difference ?
  
  Compiled with = fpc 2.7.1 = linux 64
  Compiler parameters : -MObjFPC -Scghi -CX -Os1 -Xs -XX -vewnhi -fPIC
 
 I suspect PIC is to blame. This adds a lot of tables to your library.
 
 Michael.

Hum, when compile with or without -fPIC, it does not change anything,... i get 
exactly the same size...
 
  ___
fpc-pascal maillist  -  fpc-pascal@lists.freepascal.org
http://lists.freepascal.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/fpc-pascal