> I investigated libc 2.2 when it first came out and all pointers to the > bloat was support for both 32-bit and 64-bit processors. If you could > drop the 64-bit support out of the source you would likely reduce a > huge amount of compiled code (this may be a config option). > I could be on crack myself though, this information was skimmed from > a similar discussion on a libc newsgroup post.
Dang! There goes my alpha version of LEAF...I guess I'll just have to keep my resident Alpha systems running RedHat 7.1 busy crunching seti@home work-units (I've got 5 DEC Personal Workstation 500a's, three actually running). If I ever get back to LEAF development work, I'll look into the newer glibc. One of the first things I want to do is build a portable compile environment, and other than the compiler itself, the c library is about the biggest part of the puzzle, (as well as the biggest single chunk of code in most LEAF distributions)...I'd like to see what (if anything) can be done to squeeze the c library down to size, including various compiler options, as well as compile-time defines. Charles Steinkuehler http://lrp.steinkuehler.net http://c0wz.steinkuehler.net (lrp.c0wz.com mirror) _______________________________________________ Leaf-devel mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/leaf-devel
