Date: Mon, 10 Jun 1996 12:17:54 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
To: "A.Appleyard" <A DOT APPLEYARD AT fs2 DOT mt DOT umist DOT ac DOT uk>
Cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: Why are they so fat?
In-Reply-To: <283F86A3F3E@fs2.mt.umist.ac.uk>
Message-Id: <Pine.SUN.3.91.960610121341.2931F-100000@is>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII


On Mon, 10 Jun 1996, A.Appleyard wrote:

> The extra bulk that Martin Krieger complains of, is NOT insignificant for a
> user who has to keep a lot of compiled djgpp .EXE's. In a nearly full disk,
> such extra bits of store usage per file add up.

If that hurts, you should compress your .EXE files.  Get DJP (the 
DJGPP-specific exe compressor) and run it on all your programs.  I don't 
think there is any other solution, since all that overhead of the startup 
code is pretty much optimized for size and cannot be made much smaller.

Also, you will find that, for real-world programs, DJGPP produces smaller 
executables than many other compilers; this thread had some examples (I 
don't think people have tons of ``hello world'' programs on their disk).