Date: Sun, 2 Apr 2000 08:37:28 +0200 (IST)
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
X-Sender: eliz AT is
To: Jeff Williams <jeffw AT darwin DOT sfbr DOT org>
cc: djgpp AT delorie DOT com, root AT darkstar DOT grendel DOT net
Subject: Re: [WANTED]Old GCC/GXX's
In-Reply-To: <200003241343.HAA06184@darwin.sfbr.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.SUN.3.91.1000402083543.8988G-100000@is>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk


On Fri, 24 Mar 2000, Jeff Williams wrote:

> As was also pointed out, 2.7.x has the advantage of being rather compact:
> 
> gcc2952b.zip unzips to 60 files and 5261021 bytes
> gcc2721b.zip unzips to 37 files and 2725475 bytes

GCC 2.9X is distributed unstripped.  If your disk space is at premioum, 
you can strip the executables and cut their size in half.

> As for speed, I doubt I would see an overwhelming difference on my
> old 386/387 box under DOS 5.0.

Actually, GCC 2.9X is about 30% slower than 2.7.2.x (if you use 
optimization switches).  It's in the FAQ.