Re: Smart linking under UNIX

Marc Sabatella <mjs@hpfcso.fc.hp.com>
Tue, 27 Aug 91 16:29:06 mdt

          From comp.compilers
Related articles
[10 earlier articles]
Re: Smart linking under UNIX dalamb@umiacs.umd.edu (1991-08-23)
Re: Smart linking under UNIX pardo@gar.cs.washington.edu (1991-08-23)
Re: Smart linking under UNIX thorinn@diku.dk (1991-08-25)
Re: Smart linking under UNIX przemek@rrdstrad.nist.gov (1991-08-26)
Re: Smart linking under UNIX davidsen@crdos1.crd.ge.com (1991-08-26)
Re: Smart linking under UNIX liam@dcs.qmw.ac.uk (William Roberts) (1991-08-27)
Re: Smart linking under UNIX mjs@hpfcso.fc.hp.com (Marc Sabatella) (1991-08-27)
| List of all articles for this month |
Newsgroups: comp.arch,comp.compilers
From: Marc Sabatella <mjs@hpfcso.fc.hp.com>
Keywords: linker
Organization: Compilers Central
References: 91-08-137
Date: Tue, 27 Aug 91 16:29:06 mdt

>But the sprintf (_doprintf, really) bashing is misguided. Even the floating
>point part of sprintf can be coded in a couple of pages of C, and the object
>file size is not that big. ...
>[It's true. On my SysV machine, the entire shared libc is only 26K. The X
>shared library is 213K. -John]


On the other hand, on my system:


hpmonk% ld -u _printf /lib/libc.a
hpmonk% size a.out
22984 + 3568 + 18436 = 44988


hpmonk% size /lib/libc.sl
480812 + 44728 + 96976 = 622516


This bloat comes from support for such things as quad precision conversion
("long double") and multibyte Kanji characters / "NLS" (Native Language
Support). All of which would get dragged in even by a "smart" linker, unless
it actually parsed printf() arguments, as someone suggested for FORTRAN.


My libX11 is 216K, which compares nicely to your 213K. Thus our systems appear
to be otherwise apples-to-apples.


--------------
Marc Sabatella (marc@hpmonk.fc.hp.com)
--

Post a followup to this message

Return to the comp.compilers page.
Search the comp.compilers archives again.