X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 16:03:45 +0200 From: "Eli Zaretskii" Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Message-ID: <01c4c59b$Blat.v2.2.2$e84bc8e0@zahav.net.il> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7BIT Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 2.2.2 In-reply-to: <418f5e01@news.upm.es> (message from Manuel Collado on Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:52:26 +0100) Subject: Re: Reducing size of executables in binary distributions References: <418b6a02 AT news DOT upm DOT es> <01c4c360$Blat.v2.2.2$fe8321e0 AT zahav DOT net DOT il> <418f5e01 AT news DOT upm DOT es> 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 > Date: Mon, 08 Nov 2004 12:52:26 +0100 > From: Manuel Collado > > >>Perhaps the difference in sizes is due to different compiler/library > >>versions. > > > > No, the difference is only 2KB and is due to different ways the binary > > was stripped and/or different Binutils version (`strip' is part of > > Binutils). The 2K difference is due to alignment considerations (it's > > a long story). > > I was speaking about the difference between the executable in the *s.zip > file and the executable rebuilt from sources: > > 324,608 - 294,912 = 29,696 In that case, I believe your guess is correct: it's because of the difference in compiler versions (I don't think the library has changed so much since then).