Glenn, I do not have calculated detailed numbers yet. But - http://packages.debian.org/sid/busybox-static describes that busybox as static build with many built ins - look at http://busybox.net/downloads/BusyBox.html (awk,sed,vi included) - consumes 1.4M (suspicious!) on i386 installed while ksh93 with 10 or 12 built ins consumes 2.8M installed.
I still have to verify the size numbers and the enabled range of built ins. My gut feeling says ast-ksh needs to shrink by half and double the number of built ins to be competitive with busybox. But this a gut feeling. Real numbers next week. Olga On Thu, Feb 9, 2012 at 8:30 AM, Glenn Fowler <[email protected]> wrote: > > how much space are you looking to squeeze out? > > On Thu, 9 Feb 2012 05:00:57 +0100 =?KOI8-R?B?z8zYx8Egy9LZ1sHOz9fTy8HR?= wrote: >> Developers, has any one given a thought how to reduce the code size >> used by ksh93/libcmd/ast? I've been working on some embedded system >> where disk space and code size is premium. >> Has any one here pointers, where I can look to reduce the code size used? >> For example use #ifdef to remove all the single byte code paths - >> assuming the multi byte code paths can handle the single byte >> locales.. > >> Olga >> -- >> , _ _ , >> { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } >> .----'-/`-/ [email protected] \-`\-'----. >> `'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'` >> /\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\ >> `--` `--` > >> _______________________________________________ >> ast-developers mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers > -- , _ _ , { \/`o;====- Olga Kryzhanovska -====;o`\/ } .----'-/`-/ [email protected] \-`\-'----. `'-..-| / http://twitter.com/fleyta \ |-..-'` /\/\ Solaris/BSD//C/C++ programmer /\/\ `--` `--` _______________________________________________ ast-developers mailing list [email protected] https://mailman.research.att.com/mailman/listinfo/ast-developers
