Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com Message-ID: <80575AFA5F0DD31197CE00805F650D767B215B@wilber.adroit.com> From: "Robinow, David" To: "'Sturm Volker'" , "'cygwin AT cygwin DOT com'" Subject: RE: Binary size Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2002 10:49:40 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" I get similar results. However, the stripped versions are the same size. Apparently the new compiler includes more debugging information. I haven't yet found any documentation describing this but I've barely looked. > -----Original Message----- > From: Sturm Volker [mailto:Volker DOT Sturm AT fthw DOT siemens DOT de] > Subject: WG: Binary size > > I tried out cygwin on win2k and i compiled gcc3.0.3 - apart from the > > prefix option - in the standard way. using the gcc 2.95 that came with > > cygwin and the 3.0.3 gave me a size of some compiled .exe of about 18 k > > with the old version and 35 k with the new version. the program i > > compiled for testing was: > > > > #include > > > > int main(int argc, char** argv) { > > printf("Hello world!\n"); > > return 0; > > } > > > > I used 'gcc -o myfirst myfirst.cpp' for both compiler versions. why is > > the big difference in size? -- Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple Bug reporting: http://cygwin.com/bugs.html Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/