Jeremy Huntwork wrote: > On Oct 28, 2011, at 2:41 PM, Bruce Dubbs <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Jeremy Huntwork wrote: >>> Maybe recommend using --strip-unneeded instead since that >>> intelligently does the right thing for both types of libs. >> So you recommend instead: >> >> "If disk space is very tight, the --strip-unneeded option can be used on >> the binaries and libraries in /{lib,sbin,bin,usr/{bin,sbin,lib}} to gain >> several more megabytes." >> >> Is that right? >> >> That makes me a little nervous. I think I might be more in favor of >> just dropping the last paragraph. At the end of Chapter 6, a few MB >> should just not be significant. You get a lot more space by removing >> /tools as described in section 6.64, 488M in my case. > > That works too. > > Out of curiosity, what exactly makes you nervous?
Well, --strip-unneeded doesn't, but --strip-all on libraries does because I think using that would basically destroy static libraries. The chance of a user using a wildcard with that is reasonably high. Do we have a specific amount of space saved by that procedure? Is it significant? -- Bruce -- http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/lfs-dev FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/faq/ Unsubscribe: See the above information page
