On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 05:43:52PM +0100, William Rowe wrote:
> Mladen Turk wrote:
>> Joe Orton wrote:
>>> On the topic of how to split up APR into multiple libraries, I had a
>>> look through the current directories, and a first cut at how I'd
>>> propose to split the code up would be:
...
>> What's the technical reason for that?
>> With the merging of apr and apr-util I was hoping
>> we would have to care only on a single library
>> and now there will be dozen of them. Scary.
>
> Yes - I think this is a little overboard, but must be balanced
> by the size of the code.
Right - but the primary motivation is as Ruediger says, to isolate
dependencies, not to split by size.
w.r.t. size, I did this for the apr-trunk, which I think is a reasonable
measure of code size across directories - for information...
$ for f in *; do \
find $f -name \*.o | xargs ar cru ${f}.a && strip -g ${f}.a; \
done
$ ls -1sk *.a | sort -n | tail -20
16 uri.a
20 hooks.a
28 xml.a
40 memory.a
44 random.a
44 tables.a
48 ldap.a
56 crypto.a
56 memcache.a
56 misc.a
56 poll.a
60 threadproc.a
64 dbd.a
68 locks.a
72 dbm.a
76 strings.a
80 network_io.a
104 buckets.a
104 util-misc.a
120 file_io.a
