X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to djgpp-bounces using -f
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Hans-Bernhard_Br=F6ker?= <HBBroeker AT t-online DOT de>
Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
Subject: Re: problem with AS from binutils 2.21.1
Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 00:37:48 +0100
Lines: 22
Message-ID: <9metebFli9U1@mid.dfncis.de>
References: <8a32880d-526c-40ac-a9bb-e88fce4ee2aa AT z25g2000vbs DOT googlegroups DOT com> <21258842-845d-4b87-9c29-52d0528e2ca0 AT dp8g2000vbb DOT googlegroups DOT com> <76df8c48-1463-43d1-98a1-4c32fb5c7643 AT t16g2000vba DOT googlegroups DOT com> <3e83fb36-219b-4314-8201-7f0047eb60d2 AT z12g2000yqm DOT googlegroups DOT com>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Trace: news.dfncis.de qdxZxhVYMmCwgJYimVoD3wg1PbsvPntWgj+gu5J31AIeyoSrMZxu0xnFEz
Cancel-Lock: sha1:ltJSrDqxGiHNynfBLF+t2GtNQss=
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111105 Thunderbird/8.0
In-Reply-To: <3e83fb36-219b-4314-8201-7f0047eb60d2@z12g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>
Bytes: 2212
To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com
DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp
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 02.01.2012 00:34, Rugxulo wrote:

> I unpacked it and cross-compiled (this one file only!) atop PuppyLinux
> with Ozkan's GCC 3.4.6 toolchain (as + ld 2.16.1). I didn't see any
> reloc warnings, so I'm guessing it's something GCC 4.6.2 specific.

Not really.  Comparing output from two versions of GCC that far away 
from each other doesn't make terribly much sense.  Flipping a single 
option, or updating GCC by a single minor release could _completely_ 
change the output.  After all if it didn't, what would be the point in 
making new version of the compiler?

> Granted, it is fairly large output, but definitely not 3.4 MB, only
> 800 kb. Perhaps latest Dwarf-3 or whatever or latest GCC 4.6.2 output
> is more bloated than it used to be with older GCC 3.4.6 ??

"Bloated" doesn't have anything to do with it.  This is code (and 
compiler switches to build it with) that was fine-tuned to within an 
inch of its life to be one thing, and one thing only: _fast_.  Change a 
single one of those and you'll be comparing apples with tractors.