> > it's 16ms normally and 8ms when using static link
> >
> > 8ms is anyway million CPU cycles on my machine (pentium-133).
>
> I'll bet there's a bunch of I/O, even if from buffers, in that
> additional 8ms.

whole program took <4kB dynamic and <12kB static.


> > what incredibly complicated operations ld-elf.so is doing to link such
> > simple programs (containing minimal set of references to libs) to do it so
> > long?
>
> If you don't already know, you probably don't want to know.  It's really
> quite a sick and horrid and inefficient hack the way dynamic libraries
> work on SunOS-4 and now BSD for ELF binaries.  I've thought so since day

yes i know it but why running STATIC binary takes so much?
or am i missing something.

BTW. you wrote "BSD for ELF binaries". so you mean with a.out binaries
it's faster/better? if so why we moved to ELF?

> See my archived postings (to current-users, I think) about just how much
> faster my all-100%-static-linked NetBSD/sparc machine is
> (even/especially with X11!).

and how much RAM does it take (esp with X11) ...