Message-ID: <004c01c214fa$28771eb0$0100a8c0@p4>
From: "Andrew Cottrell" <acottrel AT ihug DOT com DOT au>
To: <djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com>, "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
References:  <10206131551 DOT AA17658 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu> <2593-Sat15Jun2002190642+0300-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04
Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2002 15:52:21 +1000
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2600.0000
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2600.0000
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

> > From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
> > Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:51:14 -0500 (CDT)
> >
> > One of the concerns I've had (and heard from others) is the size and
> > speed of CVS images vs current 2.03.
>
> Any details?  I only know about the size bloat when libiconv is
> linked into the binary, for i18n.

If it helps I can send a directory listing of my djgpp bin directory before
and after stripping the files. I also have seen a big difference with the
updated packages that are linked to libiconv which seems to be occuring more
and more.

Regards,
Andrew