This is the mail archive of the libc-alpha@sources.redhat.com mailing list for the glibc project.


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]
Other format: [Raw text]

Re: Statically linked binary way way too big


On 16 October 2002 05:24, Kaz Kylheku wrote:
> > > > int main() {
> > > >         return 0;
> > > > }
> > > >
> > > > Based on release announcements ("we don't want
> > > > to hear about size") and discussions with Linus
> > > > seen in archive I know that glibc does not try
> > > > to minimize library size, but nearly half a megabyte
> > > > can never be right.
> > >
> > > Why do you say this? How do you determine which size would be
> > > right, and which would not?
> >
> > Say that again? It's ok for this program to occupy 400k?
>
> Based on the relative frequency of static versus dynamic linking,
> I'd say that it's irrelevant how big or small a static binary is.

I don't ask is it relevant or not. I'm asking *why* is it so big?
--
vda


Index Nav: [Date Index] [Subject Index] [Author Index] [Thread Index]
Message Nav: [Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]