Subject: Re: Remove printf %b support from libsa?
To: None <firstname.lastname@example.org>
From: Ben Harris <email@example.com>
Date: 04/20/2003 20:22:46
On Sun, 20 Apr 2003, Ben Harris wrote:
> Removing %b support from libsa as well would save 184 bytes on ARM, and
> presumably a similar amount on other architectures. I suspect this would
> be good for those architectures whose bootloaders are currently
> overflowing (e.g. pmax by 248 bytes).
Ignore my comments about pmax -- it doesn't use libsa's printf.
> Can anyone think of a reason why I shouldn't do this? In particular, is
> %b used somewhere I haven't noticed?
I still think this would be sensible.
Ben Harris <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Portmaster, NetBSD/acorn26 <URL:http://www.netbsd.org/Ports/acorn26/>