Hi Mickaël,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] a écrit
> > Did you stripped your binaries ?
Alex a écrit
> As far as I remember I handled both builds (old and new) the same.
> <snip>
> I may have (unwittingly) stripped the old packages
> (glibc-2.3.4 and gcc-3.4.3) after all.
You were absolutely right.
As a quick check I just did a 'strip --strip-debug' on the current e2fsck.
The file went from 2,889,537 to 781,293 bytes precipitously.
So I have to (rather sheepishly) admit that the "Bloat scare" was just another
false alarm.
Here's a simple comparison summarizing the (messy) situation
on my machine
(and contributing to the advancement of science as well).
e2fsck v1.39 size (in bytes)
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
1. Built with both glibc-2.3.4 and gcc-3.4.3 STRIPPED
(but the file itself NOT stripped)
1,354,457
2. Built with NEITHER glibc-2.5 NOR gcc-4.1.2 stripped
2,889,537
3. The file in 2 above STRIPPED (to its underwear)
781,293
4. FWIW, obviously for a complete picture, at least another test with
glibc-2.3.4 and gcc-3.4.3 NOT stripped would be in order.
Unfortunately, it's hard (if not impossible) to turn back the wheels of time.
Thanks again for your words of wisdom.
Best wishes,
-- Alex
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-support
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
