On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 02:34:05PM -0400, Matt Zimmerman wrote: > On Sun, Jun 16, 2002 at 07:29:22PM +0200, Magnus Ekdahl wrote:
> Which packages or programs seem superfluous to you? > > ncurses-base > textutils > bsdutils > sed > base-passwd > util-linux > ncurses-bin > tar > gzip > dpkg > base-files > findutils > shellutils > grep > mount > e2fsprogs > sysvinit > perl-base > hostname > fileutils > login > diff > bash > debianutils > > I find this list quite reasonable; a case could perhaps be made against > Perl, but having it available in base has saved me many times (including on > the Zaurus, where I needed to setuid(geteuid()) from a shell). You might be able replace the sed and grep binaries with perl scripts that do the same, but it's probably not worth it. Particularly as subtle regexp corner case differences between perl and the other two may make some shell scripts break. $ ls -l /bin/sed /bin/grep -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 54708 Jun 26 2001 /bin/grep -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 22060 Jul 5 2001 /bin/sed And I suspect that the effort you'd spend in writing and maintaining the duplicate code would find more than 76k of savings elsewhere. On Mon, Jun 17, 2002 at 04:51:28AM +1000, Glenn McGrath wrote: > Another one that could make a signifact difference for space constrained > systems is the ability compile with -Os, specifying in the binary metadata > what compile options were used or something. However it would be difficult > to implement due to non-technical reasons. Experimenting with -Os I've never found it that good at making binaries much smaller on arm. (I think I was getting less than 1% smaller. The object files in question happened to be current development perl. I'm not sure if that makes a difference, ie whether the styleof C in perl isn't the sort of thing that gcc's -Os can get a grip on) Nicholas Clark -- Even better than the real thing: http://nms-cgi.sourceforge.net/ -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
