WelcomeWelcome | FAQFAQ | DownloadsDownloads | WikiWiki

Author Topic: which version of strip are you using?  (Read 2512 times)

Offline Roberto A. Foglietta

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
    • personal home page
which version of strip are you using?
« on: April 09, 2009, 03:12:23 PM »
As you can see TC executable are very very stripped, what are you using to do that ??? If you are using sstrip from busybox I think you should include sstrip into tcbase's busybox.  ::)   

Code: [Select]
tc@box:~/downloads/wbar-1.3.3$ ls -al /usr/bin/wbar
-rwxr-xr-x    1 root     root        41716 Apr  9 09:31 /usr/bin/wbar
tc@box:~/downloads/wbar-1.3.3$ ls -al wbar
-rwxr-xr-x    1 tc       staff       66520 Apr 10 00:07 wbar
tc@box:~/downloads/wbar-1.3.3$ size /usr/bin/wbar
   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
      0       0       0       0       0 /usr/bin/wbar
tc@box:~/downloads/wbar-1.3.3$ size wbar
   text    data     bss     dec     hex filename
  63819     776     504   65099    fe4b wbar

Offline Juanito

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11064
Re: which version of strip are you using?
« Reply #1 on: April 09, 2009, 09:52:27 PM »
strip is included in the compiletc extension - it also seems like more and more packages accept "make install-strip".

Offline mikshaw

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
Re: which version of strip are you using?
« Reply #2 on: April 09, 2009, 10:02:23 PM »
but is that the same strip that was used in TC base?  I think that was the question.

Offline Roberto A. Foglietta

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
    • personal home page
Re: which version of strip are you using?
« Reply #3 on: April 10, 2009, 02:34:29 AM »
but is that the same strip that was used in TC base?  I think that was the question.

yes that was the question because the strip included into compiletc does not do the same job of those used to make .iso content

Offline curaga

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10048
Re: which version of strip are you using?
« Reply #4 on: April 12, 2009, 06:28:18 AM »
Yes, it was the regular GNU strip. The reason why you don't get as small binaries lies in the optimization, for example try adding the "-Os" (optimize for size) to your CFLAGS before running configure.
The only barriers that can stop you are the ones you create yourself.

Offline Juanito

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11064
Re: which version of strip are you using?
« Reply #5 on: April 12, 2009, 06:56:35 AM »
..but be aware that using "-Os" causes some compile runs to fail and the error messages do not indicate that "-Os" was the cause of the failure...

Offline Roberto A. Foglietta

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 70
    • personal home page
Re: which version of strip are you using?
« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2009, 02:47:12 AM »
Yes, it was the regular GNU strip. The reason why you don't get as small binaries lies in the optimization, for example try adding the "-Os" (optimize for size) to your CFLAGS before running configure.

Regular 'strip' nor '-Os' give out a '0 0 0 0' when 'size' is called!  ::)