Re: convenience libraries binary size

2006-08-02 Thread Pieter Grimmerink
On Tuesday 01 August 2006 15:26, Andreas Schwab wrote: Pieter Grimmerink [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. move all 200 sourcefiles back into a single directory... 2. stop using autotools, so we no longer need convenience libs to handle subdirectories You don't need convenience libraries to

Re: convenience libraries binary size

2006-08-02 Thread Harlan Stenn
Is the *file* size bigger or are the results of 'size progname' bigger? h

Re: convenience libraries binary size

2006-08-02 Thread Pieter Grimmerink
On Wednesday 02 August 2006 20:18, Harlan Stenn wrote: Is the *file* size bigger or are the results of 'size progname' bigger? I've just compared the size of the binary, I didn't use the 'size' command. Regards, Pieter

Re: convenience libraries binary size

2006-08-01 Thread Pieter Grimmerink
On Wednesday 26 July 2006 13:45, Pieter Grimmerink wrote: In an autotools project, I recently moved sourcefiles into convenience libraries, because the number of sourcefiles was getting rather large. Before this reorganisation, the binary size of the resulting (stripped) executable was about

Re: convenience libraries binary size

2006-08-01 Thread Andreas Schwab
Pieter Grimmerink [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: 1. move all 200 sourcefiles back into a single directory... 2. stop using autotools, so we no longer need convenience libs to handle subdirectories You don't need convenience libraries to handle subdirectories. Have you tried subdir-objects?