On 11/17/08, Masoom Shaikh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Kris Kennaway <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:56:31PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote: >> > >> > >most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on >> > > disk >> > > >> > >stripping em all reduces their size dramatically >> > > >> > >I cannot see the reason for not stripping them by default ? >> > >> > me too >> > > >> > >do I miss anything ? >> > >> > no. >> >> I am confused why both of you are seeing "most" of the programs >> installed this way. Can you confirm that this is true and not just an >> exaggeration? >> >> As Matthew says, there are some ports that fail to strip their >> binaries because of how they install files (using cp etc). These are >> bugs that should be reported to their maintainers on a case by case >> basis. >> >> Kris >> >> -- >> In God we Trust -- all others must submit an X.509 certificate. >> -- Charles Forsythe <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >> > Before sending mail I manually stripped * in /usr/local/bin
And what about /usr/local/lib/** ? > > else I cud send u the o/p of `ls -lhS` > > yes, "most" is bit exaggerated...I perhaps was talking about first five > > binaries listed in increasing order of size... > _______________________________________________ > email@example.com mailing list > http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions > To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]" > _______________________________________________ firstname.lastname@example.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"