> > > I don't work with embedded systems, but maybe compiling with -Os
> > > will help.
> > > As I understand it, it's the option of choice to produce the
> > > smallest possible files.
> >
> > Good point. Aside from that optimization, I would try to link
> > Cherokee statically with it own libraries, and dynamically with the
> > rest of the system libraries such as libc or libpthread. I bet that
> > could help to build a much lighter binary.
> 
> I don't know whether Cherokee already does it, but linking against
> dietlibc instead of glibc often helps prune binary size. Stripping the
> symbols by compiling with "-s" is very important too, it took Hello
> World down from 500k to 5k in the test I just ran. It makes it much
> harder to debug though.

* I was already stripping the binary (with "strip"), which has the same
effect as "-s" in the LDFLAGS.

* However, I had forgotten to use "-Os" in the CFLAGS (which I usually
do). This reduces the size from 310508 to 294108 bytes.

* I am also linking against uClibc (that's why I have
ac_cv_func_malloc_0_nonnull=yes ac_cv_func_realloc_0_nonnull=yes).

* Is it possible to link with an external PCRE lib?

* I've also seen that when configured with

--enable-static-module=fcgi,file,round_robin

it shows:

checking module "file"... static
checking module "fcgi"... static
checking module "cgi"... static
checking module "round_robin"... static

all the others being dynamic.

Does enabling "fcgi" statically automatically imply "cgi" statically?

* I don't understand why having a "fcgi" handler requires a balancer.

I'd like to be able to just do this:

vserver!default!directory!/!handler = fcgi
vserver!default!directory!/!handler!host = localhost:1234


Thanks for your answers.
_______________________________________________
Cherokee mailing list
[email protected]
http://cherokee-project.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/cherokee

Reply via email to