Am 20.07.2017 12:17, schrieb Denys Vlasenko:
> On Wed, Jul 19, 2017 at 6:38 PM, Kang-Che Sung <[email protected]> wrote:
>> (https://git.busybox.net/busybox/commit/?id=4eed2c6c5092ed95b8ee6d994106c54a9fc6ed3e)
>>
>> I don't like this. I don't like these size info to be put on the titles
>> of config options. A few reasons:
>> * It can give a false impression that the size of the final busybox
>>   binary is the size of these applets summed up, but it's actually not.
>>   (Some code can share among applets)
>> * The sizes are CPU architecture dependent.
> 
> Sure, on a different arch, sizes would change, but "20k" applet is
> still approximately 4 times larger than "5k" one.
> that's useful information for the user.
>

to be korrekt we would need to test with every new compiler/-option more over
nobody knows when this claim was made. It should be clear for every programmer
"your milage may vary" is here in big letters.


>> * How the sizes are measured are even unclear. So, does the size include
>>   all optional features of the applet, or is it only the basic
>>   functionality?
>>
>> If I were to mention the size in menuconfig, I would put in the help
>> texts of the config options, rather than their titles. And be clear how
>> the size is measured, for example:
>>
>>    CONFIG_BINZIP2
>>    (Adds about 8.8kB on i686, for bzip2 decompression code)
>>    CONFIG_BZIP2
>>    (Adds about 18kB on i686, for bzip2 compression and decompression code)
> 
> Can you automate this for 400 applets and ~600 options?
> 


I guess there is no need, what about a description in the beginig like
"All sizes relate to i686, depending on your target arch this may differ"
(replace i686 with anything you like)

This would solve 2 problems.
1. it is clear what the base is (Kang-Che Sung point 3 is valid)
2. in future all claims like "save 200 Bytes (tested on MIPSxyz)" are off 
limits.


re,
 wh


>> Or alternatively, don't mention the size at all.
> 
> The sizes are helping users see which applets are bigger.
> Without sizes, it was pure guesswork: if someone optimizes for size,
> he would semi-randomly choose what to "sacrifice".
> _______________________________________________
> busybox mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
> 
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox

Reply via email to