Message-ID:	<375EA97F.38E2AB1F@pallen.dabsol.co.uk>
Date:	Wed, 09 Jun 1999 18:50:55 +0100
From:	Peter Allen <P DOT Allen AT pallen DOT dabsol DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.5 [en] (Win95; I)
X-Accept-Language:	en
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: Hello World and File size
References:	<8D53104ECD0CD211AF4000A0C9D60AE30141E446 AT probe-2 DOT acclaim-euro DOT net> <19990609111727 DOT 16923 DOT 00002561 AT ng-fz1 DOT aol DOT com>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com

R124c4u2 wrote:
> 
> Shawn Hargreaves writes:
> 
> >All too true. But I'd just like to add that there is also an
> >efficiency argument in favour of static linking, odd though that
> >may seem.
> <snip remainder>
> -----------------
> Here's a quick check to demonstrate the wonderful advantages of DLL files.  I
> have a rather vanilla Winodws 95 system.  I have added very, very little to
> what the system came with.
> 
> Despite that, my C:\windows\system contains 473 DLL files with an aggregate
> size of 47.9 MB.  And I am not claiming that is all the DLLs on the system, it
> is just one hotbed of them I happen to know of.
> 
> I have no idea how to prune that list of DLLs that have never been used, will
> never be used, and shouldn't have been put there in the first place.
> 
> DLLs might possibly, just barely possibly, have been a good idea at one time.
> They have turned into an absolute disaster!

Advantage of having standardised package managment.  It can tell you
whats not
needed, and not let you delete librarys which have dependancys.
	
		Peter Allen

- Raw text -