[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CAK1hOcMoTFksB1i0Sho93p31Hu0kkWZMnNLVL9EssT4jxtDiVA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Aug 2017 00:13:31 +0200
From: Denys Vlasenko <vda.linux@...glemail.com>
To: Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org>
Cc: busybox <busybox@...ybox.net>, Felix Fietkau <nbd@....name>, musl <musl@...ts.openwall.com>
Subject: Re: bbox: musl versus uclibc
On Mon, Aug 14, 2017 at 8:48 PM, Rich Felker <dalias@...c.org> wrote:
>> Now, the good news - musl has smaller data!
>> 6695 bytes versus 7129 bytes for uclibc:
>>
>> text data bss dec hex filename
>> 894902 465 6664 902031 dc38f busybox.uclibc
>> 912538 563 6132 919233 e06c1 busybox.musl
>
> Probably getpw*/getgr* static buffers or something. musl's backend for
> these just uses the buffer out of getline so as not to impose cost in
> apps that don't need the legacy (non-_r) functions or an arbitrary
> limit on record length.
>
> It would be interesting to know where the text size increase comes
> from.
See attached (only musl data is in the file).
Download attachment "busybox_unstripped.map.data" of type "application/octet-stream" (7510 bytes)
Powered by blists - more mailing lists
Confused about mailing lists and their use?
Read about mailing lists on Wikipedia
and check out these
guidelines on proper formatting of your messages.
