Re: Trivial program size inflation

[tlaronde%polynum.com@localhost]

Le Fri, Jun 30, 2023 at 01:37:10PM -0400, Mouse a écrit :
> Based on something at work, I was looking at executable sizes.  I
> eventually tried a program stripped about as far down as I could:
> 
> int main(void);
> int main(void)
> {
>  return(0);
> }
> 
> and built it -static.  size on the resulting binary:
> 
> sparc, my mutant 1.4T:
> 
> text    data    bss     dec     hex     filename
> 12616   124     288     13028   32e4    main
> 
> amd64, my mutant 5.2:
> 
>    text	   data	    bss	    dec	    hex	filename
>  152613	   4416	  16792	 173821	  2a6fd	main
> 
> amd64, 9.0_STABLE (ftp.n.o):
> 
>    text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
>  562318   29064 2176416 2767798  2a3bb6 main
> 
> 12K to do nothing is bad enough (I'm going to be looking at why it's
> that big).  149K is even more disturbing (I'll be looking at that too).
> But over half a meg of text and two megs of BSS?  To do nothing?
> Surely something is wrong somewhere.

What are the compiler (especially the linker) and compiler version on
your 1.4T vs. 9.0?

Having the obligation to support a myriad of systems for kerTeX, I have
seen that, unfortunately, static linking is considered nowadays a second
rate feature if not a deprecated one, and this is a part I have to
adjust from time to time, generally for Linuces, to obtain static binaries.

Other thing to look at: the so called i18n. On NetBSD, iconv doesn't
work with static linking, but could it be that its object are
nonetheless added too? As well as threading and so on?
-- 
        Thierry Laronde <tlaronde +AT+ polynum +dot+ com>
                     http://www.kergis.com/
                    http://kertex.kergis.com/
Key fingerprint = 0FF7 E906 FBAF FE95 FD89  250D 52B1 AE95 6006 F40C