From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-159000-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 42D9513838B
	for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 17:28:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5399DE094A;
	Mon, 29 Sep 2014 17:28:12 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-la0-f51.google.com (mail-la0-f51.google.com [209.85.215.51])
	(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
	(No client certificate requested)
	by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 70139E08D5
	for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 17:28:10 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-la0-f51.google.com with SMTP id pv20so8721011lab.24
        for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 10:28:08 -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=AdN+fJL5ymE6lXOICp7Z4jP2chhQhatoYb4bXKImkig=;
        b=H+8gnvMgdcxNXDjxrpAdYULdxg7x0tvxzbevJDZXz9/iMO2uFVHux9SUFSQyZh/Bfp
         fvs+pyGXnhVnThTiqbAzL1KGDrbWj2AjQvVmYkp1edkxtvnkKWJPor+sW0Zg6o7Nrwa4
         awmNbj22s32Ugys9NO9h1n3s8Tj7fXFBYmnWeOsWq0S3K6GjEpb8m2mK7X6voqTg0g2e
         d1ivAnXi9RjL6wUJc84nf0f6EK5HN4YaHE/adPV1GpE7LCUVl2gzayHKD/mR/IdVgrQ6
         CUAXgTdCOHorszPYxwFfSKhRTcJq/hmqbmmeAVZg5gb5jJJptvzUa3dTLPWFUsAAkUum
         HBRA==
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 10.112.134.229 with SMTP id pn5mr12913653lbb.22.1412011688844;
 Mon, 29 Sep 2014 10:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.114.57.141 with HTTP; Mon, 29 Sep 2014 10:28:08 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <54298A6B.7060309@admin-box.com>
References: <CAKpSnpJj2mPs6qmOUutRYbtkPi04-+O=h5uruanDHY6bc5RmYA@mail.gmail.com>
	<54298A6B.7060309@admin-box.com>
Date: Mon, 29 Sep 2014 18:28:08 +0100
Message-ID: <CAKpSnpLX-ZOTFU9y-EKybYNz9navFvggWbOkJwbs4RopCXYsig@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: b2bb41c5-ec35-444c-975d-d87a86df1c25
X-Archives-Hash: 1b428f0d3cddc51fb5a360111b920d33

On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Daniel Troeder <daniel@admin-box.com> wrote:
> Am 28.09.2014 um 10:44 schrieb Jorge Almeida:
>> I'm having a somewhat disgusting issue on my Gentoo: binaries are
>> unaccountably large.


>>
>> Jorge Almeida
>>
> Hi :)


Hi, thanks for replying.
>
> I have compared some exes and libs from Ubuntu 14.04 and my Gentoo (both
> x86_64) and for similar versions it seems like most of _my_ Gentoo
> binaries are around 10% bigger (a few are 10% smaller). I have
> completely ignored GCC settings (both are 4.8.x though). IMO your sample
> (one 5-10 kb program) is not representative for the distro in general.

Actually, I didn't even thought of comparing sizes of the distros
binaries (the ones that are produced by emerging). My programs were
first compiled against dietlibc (where I noticed the size difference),
so they do not depend on USE variables nor CFLAGS. And glibc is not
the culprit. Maybe gcc, unless it is binutils, or who knows...
But if bash etc is bigger than in other distros (or not), that's fine
by me, the devs sure know better than I.

>

>
> IMO you shouldn't compare 4.8.x with 4.9.x.

My atom (Slackware) has gcc 4.8.2, Gentoo had 4.7.3. I emerged 4.8.3
(~x86) because with 4.7.3 it was even worse!

>
> I don't want to dismiss your concern with your specific program. In your
> case it is a big difference, and I'm curios too, where it comes from.
>
> Maybe you can find out more by a more thorough comparation of the flags
> GCC uses at runtime by comparing the output of:
>
> gcc -Q <your flags (w/o -pipe)> --help=target
> gcc -Q <your flags (w/o -pipe)> --help=optimizers
>

Thanks for the suggestion. I'll look at it carefully.

Jorge