Steve Underwood wrote:
>
> Garst R. Reese wrote:
>
> >Andreas Schwarz wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >>Which optimization level did you use for mspgcc? -Os produces the
> >>smallest code.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >Should -Os be used to compile msp430-libc, binutils, and mspgcc?
> >I found nothing in the doc.txt of FAQ on optimization.
> >
> linutils and gcc run on the host. Do you really want those compiled as
> small as possible :-)
I was just surprised by "Which optimization level did you use for
mspgcc?"
^^^
and wanted to be sure I was not missing something.
> libc, on the other hand, is your own choice. The default build does not
> use -Os, but there is nothing stopping you trying a customised -Os
> build, if you are desperate for the smallest size. However, note that
> smallest is not equivalent to fastest.
That I know. But if I get into size problems, it is also nice to know
that I can
pick up some somes by recompiling libc.
>
Thanks,
Garst
