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.