Mail Archives: djgpp/1998/03/26/08:24:56
On Thu, 26 Mar 1998, Eugene Ageenko wrote:
> > 1) The versions of your GCC and Binutils;
>
> Hey Man!, its me again, I have the LATEST binary distribution og GCC and related tools,
> just taken 2 days ago from SimTel. Look there for versions.
Please bear with me. I reply to too many problem reports on any given
day, and cannot afford keeping track of everybody and their versions. I
prefer to ask explicitly instead of relying on my failing memory and
veering away of the real cause.
> $strip test.exe
> $dir
>
> TEST EXE 38 552 26.03.98 13:40 test.exe
>
> # now let's use different tactic
>
> $strip test
> $coff2exe test
>
> TEST 34 456 26.03.98 13:41 test
> TEST EXE 36 504 26.03.98 13:41 test.exe
Robert, it seems like `strip' from the latest Binutils prepends the stub
twice (the added size iz 4K instead of 2K). Can you please explain what
happens here?
> Now the question - Is this RIGHT, that file size increaes?
What happens if you say "strip test.exe" 3 or 4 times? Does it add 2KB
every time or only the first time?
> Is it right that file size of stripped executable is larger that file size of
> executable produced from stripped coff file?
All the different ways to get a stripped binary (gcc -s, strip coff, and
strip .exe) should all yield the same size. Any other result means a bug
somewhere. In this case, the bug seems to be in the case when `strip' is
invoked on stubified .exe program.
> And also: why file size increases when we try to strip executable produced
> from already stripped coff file???
Because it seems to add another 2KB-long stub. Can you look at the
larger .exe and see if the stub is indeed prepended twice?
- Raw text -