On 05/23/11 04:22 PM, Alasdair Lumsden wrote:
Hi Albert,
Thanks for the feedback, partial answers inline below!
On 23 May 2011, at 16:05, Albert Lee wrote:
Should we be linking libgcc statically (apparently adds on the order
of 10k to every binary) or will every application depend on a package
with the gcc libraries?
Still open for discussion - what are you/others thoughts? Beyond just the
on-disk size, there's the in-memory size and presumably a performance
difference.
I think I would be after linking libgcc in statically by default. I
would help binaries produced by ISVs to be more portable especially
after we switch to a newer compiler in the future.
2. Follow the library layout guidelines set down by SFE
I would look at the guidelines again. If we are deciding that gcc will
be the default/official compiler maybe we could use the standard paths
for its libraries, etc.
3. Compile gcc to use Sun ld, but GNU as
+1
As Sun ld and GNU as are recommended by the upstream.
http://gcc.gnu.org/install/specific.html
Andrzej
_______________________________________________
oi-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
