On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 07:32:23 +
Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Paul B. Mahol wrote:
On 11/26/08, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most
cases it will be a simple
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Kris Kennaway wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 06:40:34PM +, Masoom Shaikh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:56:31PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
most of the programs
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
use INSTALL_* macros instead of cp/bsdtar etc. This would be a good
project to get some familiarity with the
On 11/26/08, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
use INSTALL_* macros instead of cp/bsdtar etc. This
Paul B. Mahol wrote:
On 11/26/08, Matthew Seaman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Matthew Seaman wrote:
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
use INSTALL_* macros instead of
On Wed, Nov 19, 2008 at 5:38 AM, Jeremy Chadwick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 08:42:12AM +, Masoom Shaikh wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason for
On 11/17/08, Masoom Shaikh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:56:31PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on
disk
stripping em all
On Nov 18, 2008, at 8:45 AM, Paul B. Mahol wrote:
And what about /usr/local/lib/** ?
Interesting. I found that only 11 are stripped on my system compared
to 272 not stripped
That is pretty much the opposite of the ratio I round in /usr/local/
bin where there were something like 350
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 08:42:12AM +, Masoom Shaikh wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason for not stripping them by default ?
do I miss anything ?
I haven't seen anyone
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:56:31PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason for not stripping them by default ?
me too
do I miss anything ?
no.
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:56:31PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 06:40:34PM +, Masoom Shaikh wrote:
On Mon, Nov 17, 2008 at 5:21 PM, Kris Kennaway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Nov 16, 2008 at 12:56:31PM +0100, Wojciech Puchar wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
Kris Kennaway wrote:
Bonus points if you come up with a patch to do this: in most cases it
will be a simple matter of changing the port's do-install: target to
use INSTALL_* macros instead of cp/bsdtar etc. This would be a good
project to get some familiarity with the ports tree.
Would it be
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason for not stripping them by default ?
do I miss anything ?
___
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
Masoom Shaikh wrote:
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason for not stripping them by default ?
do I miss anything ?
Yes. Binaries installed from the ports system /are/ already
most of the programs installed from ports have large binary size on disk
stripping em all reduces their size dramatically
I cannot see the reason for not stripping them by default ?
me too
do I miss anything ?
no.
___
16 matches
Mail list logo
