------- Comment #9 from aldot at gcc dot gnu dot org 2008-01-24 16:15 ------- Stats:
-rw-r--r-- 1 1000 1000 3853392 Jan 24 13:28 ./build_i686/gcc-4.3.0-target.IMA/i686-linux-uclibc/libgcc/libgcc.a 2826503 34784 8 2861295 2ba8ef (TOTALS) -rw-r--r-- 1 1000 1000 4569970 Jan 24 14:00 ./build_i686/gcc-4.3.0-target/i686-linux-uclibc/libgcc/libgcc.a 2853491 34800 310 2888601 2c1399 (TOTALS) So roughly a 15% on-disk size-saving for the static libgcc. libgcc_s.so: -rwxr-xr-x 1 1000 1000 40608 Jan 24 15:58 ./gcc-4.3.0-target.IMA.so/i686-linux-uclibc/libgcc/libgcc_s.so.1 -rwxr-xr-x 1 1000 1000 187940 Jan 24 15:14 ./gcc-4.3.0-target.so/i686-linux-uclibc/libgcc/libgcc_s.so.1 text data bss dec hex filename 11210 284 32 11526 2d06 ./gcc-4.3.0-target.IMA.so/i686-linux-uclibc/libgcc/libgcc_s.so.1 42013 436 336 42785 a721 ./gcc-4.3.0-target.so/i686-linux-uclibc/libgcc/libgcc_s.so.1 Approximately 73% size-saving and 78% on-disk savings. -- http://gcc.gnu.org/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=33396
