On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 03:00:11PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: > ---- Original Message ----- > From: "Christopher Faylor" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2001 2:58 PM > Subject: Re: openssh static size. and -ffunction-sections > > > > On Wed, Nov 21, 2001 at 02:53:59PM +1100, Robert Collins wrote: > > >Just a thought: was the openssl static libraries built > > >with -ffunction-sections? > > > > > >If not, then that may be why the openssh static binaries where so big > > >and so I think that -ffunction-sections should be mandatory for > > >packagers, unless the libraries sources is one-function-per-file > > >structured (which achieves the same thing).
It wasn't built with -ffunction-sections. That's a problem if the maintainer doesn't even know that switch :-) I could add it but, hmm, OpenSSH is now linked against the OpenSSL DLLs and I've just had a look into the OpenSSL build tree. It already consists of many many single object files. Most functionality is already encapsulated in a single small source file, AFAICS. Does the -ffunction-sections option still makes sense then? Corinna -- Corinna Vinschen Please, send mails regarding Cygwin to Cygwin Developer mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Red Hat, Inc.
