From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-158988-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
	by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7B45D13838B
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:45:53 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 553F7E08BD;
	Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:45:47 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-la0-f54.google.com (mail-la0-f54.google.com [209.85.215.54])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E956CE08A1
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 11:45:45 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-la0-f54.google.com with SMTP id gm9so84479lab.27
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=cUW4F2R2F9zETJ7k7ajQDr8aTWINV61JHNsVvOHUhV4=;
        b=JvMHwTNZX2M7ZNxr1+HHIwzdH3c++dh8xeQIPC2LWw4+uXjhaxg64rhSaQtlWHhuzR
         p4+zY1CGZsxffBG++DlWpBalsbrJ+riXlQNfmW9Ik4cs5uD8gpgeaf9mGjJd5AIikLup
         KQQiUMBfdYuF7xnCwNCHgDV/KmygRNukPlj5hAD7r8vxL+SlZlDs8OZmp+xUAsOeGRTw
         Y/vWK4dsTWAAlEHzKUDCe7XFhESisv9SZOrSpGvLmkSTZs2NDu71meCHUBSWV4M9rBo5
         RU5RAcgv1BzUCES1hoy8IYsTk88zebO0WTThz5uQNA6n5EwGvgQ7SDmi6dMEyn5t1pKt
         Mzhg==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.112.146.103 with SMTP id tb7mr37203275lbb.26.1411991144195;
 Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.57.141 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 04:45:44 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20140929111844.GA6716@waltdnes.org>
References: <CAKpSnpJj2mPs6qmOUutRYbtkPi04-+O=h5uruanDHY6bc5RmYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<20140929111844.GA6716@waltdnes.org>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 12:45:44 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKpSnp+dEm0uaPjB0F=QpMFwJ-rUkBirgJSf=tg4vFvprho6Rg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] bloated by gcc
From: Jorge Almeida <jjalmeida@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Archives-Salt: 9168573c-7696-4ba3-802a-7c951f5adb81
X-Archives-Hash: 4846e1bac9218cbb497fafc7115691b6

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 12:18 PM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 09:44:16AM +0100, Jorge Almeida wrote
>> I'm having a somewhat disgusting issue on my Gentoo: binaries are
>> unaccountably large.


>   "-fno-unwind-tables" is the extra flag I have that you don't have.
> See http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.busybox/36695 for a short
> discussion ".eh_frame bloat issue - solution found".  The busybox people
> go to extreme lengths to keep the size of busybox to a minimum, so you
> can't go wrong by following their example.  I assume that you do not
> have debugging enabled.

Just tried it, no difference. The point is that the same flags should
yield similar results, and I'm getting the worst results on my Gentoo
system.
>

> I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
>
+1, BTW...