>> and built it -static. size on the resulting binary: >> sparc, my mutant 1.4T:
>> text data bss dec hex filename >> 12616 124 288 13028 32e4 main >> amd64, my mutant 5.2: >> text data bss dec hex filename >> 152613 4416 16792 173821 2a6fd main >> amd64, 9.0_STABLE (ftp.n.o): >> text data bss dec hex filename >> 562318 29064 2176416 2767798 2a3bb6 main > What are the compiler (especially the linker) and compiler version on > your 1.4T vs. 9.0? 1.4T (sparc): [Sparkle] 188> /usr/bin/gcc --version egcs-1.1.2 [Sparkle] 189> /usr/bin/ld --version GNU ld 2.9.1 Copyright 1997 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License. This program has absolutely no warranty. Supported emulations: sparcnbsd elf32_sparc sun4 [Sparkle] 190> 5.2 (amd64): [Backstop] 83> /usr/bin/gcc --version gcc (GCC) 4.1.3 20080704 prerelease (NetBSD nb3 20111107) Copyright (C) 2006 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. [Backstop] 84> /usr/bin/ld --version GNU ld version 2.16.1 Copyright 2005 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License. This program has absolutely no warranty. [Backstop] 85> 9.0_STABLE (amd64, assuming nobody changed anything between my previous runs and now): % /usr/bin/gcc --version gcc (nb4 20200810) 7.5.0 Copyright (C) 2017 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This is free software; see the source for copying conditions. There is NO warranty; not even for MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE. % /usr/bin/ld --version GNU ld (NetBSD Binutils nb1) 2.31.1 Copyright (C) 2018 Free Software Foundation, Inc. This program is free software; you may redistribute it under the terms of the GNU General Public License version 3 or (at your option) a later version. This program has absolutely no warranty. % The 1.4T and 5.2 compilers are slightly mutant, but nothing I would expect to affect this - I can describe my tweaks if you like. > Having the obligation to support a myriad of systems for kerTeX, I > have seen that, unfortunately, static linking is considered nowadays > a second rate feature if not a deprecated one, Curious, then, that it seems to be the preferred/only way for the "cool" new languages, like Rust and, I'm told, Go.... > Other thing to look at: the so called i18n. On NetBSD, iconv doesn't > work with static linking, but could it be that its object are > nonetheless added too? As well as threading and so on? Perhaps so, but why would iconv or threading be brought in for a program that does nothing? I'm sure _something_ is clearly being brought in; I suppose my report is actually along the lines of "something needs fixing; half a meg of libc (libgcc, whatever) to support a program that does nothing seems excessive". I did have a previous version which called printf, which I would expect would pull in a bunch of stuff. That version was about three times the size on 1.4T; I don't recall trying it on 5.2 or 9.0_STABLE. I then cut it down to write(), then finally all the way to nothing at all. /~\ The ASCII Mouse \ / Ribbon Campaign X Against HTML mo...@rodents-montreal.org / \ Email! 7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39 4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
