Hey,
CFLAGS: -O3
LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
without, it is 142216
is it normal ?
Vincent
--
Let Crystal Reports handle the reporting - Free Crystal Reports 2008 30-Day
trial. Sim
On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> Is the following appropriate?
>
> -
>
> Subject: Add autogen.sh to dist tarball
>
> autogen.sh is used by the debian packaging so it seems
> appropriate to include
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
> Hey,
>
> CFLAGS: -O3
> LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
>
> with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
> without, it is 142216
>
> is it normal ?
I mean, such a small difference in size
Vincent
-
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
>> Is the following appropriate?
>>
>> -
>>
>> Subject: Add autogen.sh to dist tarball
>>
>> autogen.sh is used by the deb
On Tue, Sep 08, 2009 at 08:52:39PM -0300, Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri wrote:
>- ultra-dirty hack to remove extra pointer. The hack bases on the
> fact that we just use ->last from the first node, that always have the
> ->prev == NULL. So we could have the first ->prev == ->last, but how
> to know
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>>
>> Hey,
>>
>> CFLAGS: -O3
>> LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
>>
>> with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
>> without, it is 142216
>>
>> is it normal ?
>
> I mean, such a small difference in size
i'
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:01 AM, Peter Wehrfritz wrote:
> Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri schrieb:
>>
>> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>>
>>>
Hey,
CFLAGS: -O3
LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
with amalgamation,
Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri schrieb:
> On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 4:34 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Vincent Torri wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Hey,
>>>
>>> CFLAGS: -O3
>>> LDFLAGS: -Wl,-s
>>>
>>> with amalgamation, the size of the .so is 141316
>>> without, it is 142216
>>>
>>> is it nor
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
Modified: trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h
===
--- trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h2009-09-09 10:44:25 UTC (rev
42365)
+++ trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h2
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Ivan Briano wrote:
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
Modified: trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h
===
--- trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inli
On Wed, Sep 9, 2009 at 11:13 AM, Vincent Torri wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009, Enlightenment SVN wrote:
>>
>> Modified: trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h
>> ===
>> --- trunk/eina/src/include/eina_inlist.h 2009-09-09 10:44:25
On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> > Is the following appropriate?
> >
> > -
> >
> > Subject: Add autogen.sh to dist tarball
> >
> >
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:50:04 +1000 Simon Horman said:
> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> > > Is the following appropriate?
> > >
> > > --
On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:52:39 -0300 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
said:
you've already put my word in on this. i go the accounting way. 1. it is
consistent with eina_list. 2. can be extended beyond last and include count and
many other things. 3. doesn't change inlist struct size to be bigger (tho we
do
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:46:54AM +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:50:04 +1000 Simon Horman said:
>
> > On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
> > > On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
> > > > Is the following appropriate?
> > > >
On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
you won't like this but e_remote and e's ipc are scheduled for death
(removal). 1. we have a dbu api already for e, 2. this includes the core set of
ops needed, 3. it's expandable by modules. the maintenance of ipc_handlers is
painful. i w
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:54:01 +1000 Simon Horman said:
> > actually. alibin is wrong (sorry!) autogen's do get packaged. look at
> > existing efl. we put it in so if u get a tarball u CAN easily modify the
> > configure.ac, Makefile.am's etc. and re-generate the autofoo. the script
> > will be the
On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:53:17AM +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:52:39 -0300 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
> said:
>
> you've already put my word in on this. i go the accounting way. 1. it is
> consistent with eina_list. 2. can be extended beyond last and include count
> and
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 11:19:53 +1000 Simon Horman said:
> On Thu, Sep 10, 2009 at 10:53:17AM +1000, Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Tue, 8 Sep 2009 20:52:39 -0300 Gustavo Sverzut Barbieri
> > said:
> >
> > you've already put my word in on this. i go the accounting way. 1. it is
> > consistent with
On Wednesday 09 September 2009 21:15:25 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
>
> you won't like this but e_remote and e's ipc are scheduled for death
> (removal). 1. we have a dbu api already for e, 2. this includes the core
> set of ops needed, 3.
On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 22:04:35 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
> On Wednesday 09 September 2009 21:15:25 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
> >
> > you won't like this but e_remote and e's ipc are scheduled for death
> > (removal). 1. we have a dbu api
On Wednesday 09 September 2009 22:17:48 you wrote:
> On Wed, 9 Sep 2009 22:04:35 -0400 P Purkayastha said:
> > On Wednesday 09 September 2009 21:15:25 Carsten Haitzler wrote:
> > > On Sat, 5 Sep 2009 20:46:53 -0400 P Purkayastha
> > > said:
> > >
> > > you won't like this but e_remote and e's
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:53:17 +1000 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
wrote:
> i've sen this game played before (using high order bits) and then it
> com crashing down on peoples heads when suddenly those used bits
> become relevant.
Microsoft BASIC for the Amiga I'll bet. lol
signature.asc
Des
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 14:02:19 +1000 David Seikel said:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 10:53:17 +1000 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman)
> wrote:
>
> > i've sen this game played before (using high order bits) and then it
> > com crashing down on peoples heads when suddenly those used bits
> > become relevan
On Thu, 10 Sep 2009, Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Sep 2009 09:50:04 +1000 Simon Horman said:
>
>> On Wed, Sep 09, 2009 at 09:30:24AM +0200, Albin Tonnerre wrote:
>>> On Wed, 09 Sep 2009 09:24 +1000, Simon Horman wrote :
Is the following appropriate?
--
As reported in track ticket 377 (amongst other things), eet seems
to fail to build (on Debian).
# svn checkout FOO/eet
# cd eet
# ./autogen.sh
# make
[snip]
libtool: link: gcc -std=gnu99 -Wall -O2 -fomit-frame-pointer -pipe
-Wl,--as-needed -o .libs/eet eet-eet_main.o ../../src/lib/.libs/libeet.s
26 matches
Mail list logo