Re: [dev-serveez] solaris build

[Raimi 'Raimi' Jacob]

On Thu, 6 Dec 2001, stefan wrote:

hi!

> Maybe we could inhibit the warning by using
> '-L/usr/gnu/lib/gcc-lib/sparc-sun-solaris2.8/2.95.3 -lgcc'?  I'll give it
> a try and check it into CVS.  This is because I think libtool recognises
> static archives by thefile extension ".a".  I conclude this because
> libtool does not complain about the "libiberty.a" which is a static
> library, too.

> > ... this message isnt really a surprise but i think we dont have to care
> > (since the explicit link is dynamically created).
> I agree, actually we do not need to care.

so? change and check ? or just leave it as it is ? i dont care about the
warning. since gcc --print ... is somehow guaranteed to work, i'd rather
use this thatn -L..... -lgcc (might introduce other trouble).

> > p.s.: the stripped executable is 500kb, compared to the 300kb of the x86
> > version. no real suprise, either.
> Uhm.  Why isn't this a surprise?  I wonder a bit...

SPARC is a RISC: few opcodes, all instructions have same length (32 bit in
this case). x86 is CISC: many opcodes, even variable length: a
multiplication is (for example) 1 + 4 byte in x86 (opcode, operand) while
the Sparc doesnt have a multiplication -> uses 32 "multstep" opcodes (4
byte each). this is an extreme example. another one: "dec eax" (probably 1
byte, dont know) is a "sub %r1, 1, %r1" (32 bit for sure). "mov eax,
42" is 5 byte (1+4) but 8 on Sparc (ld and sethi).

bottom line: Risc code is usually bigger than Cisc code.


Bye,
    Raimi

--
      __/\     _/\    _____/\.___/\
     /   /    /  /___/   ____/  __/\     Name    : Raimi
    /   /  __/    __/   / __/  / _\/     Contact : address@hidden
   /   /__/ /     \/   /_/_/  /_/        Visit   : http://www.lkcc.org
  /________/___/\._\._____/_____/\       3.141592653589793238462643383
  \._______\.__\/__/\.____\.____\/       27950288419716939937510582097