On Apr 1 10:25, Jeremy Drake via Cygwin-patches wrote: > On Tue, 1 Apr 2025, Corinna Vinschen wrote: > > > Oh, Jeremy, here's a question. We only add udis86 to the main branch. > > What about the 3.6 branch, does it still need a patch to accommodate > > the fast_cwd magic for a newer, upcoming Windows version? > > I was going to ask about that too. I assume the plan is to keep the new > udis86 code for 3.7, and continue applying band-aids to the old code on > 3.6 as needed. The question remains, do we apply band-aids for insider > builds or wait for an actual release (or something approximating a release > candidate)?
We shouldn't try to accommodate every insider build. The fallback code works for them good enough I think. Ultimately we support the released versions only, so starting with a release candidate is early enough. > > And btw., I checked the file size again, and it turns out that after > > stripping the debug symbols the DLL takes ~30 pages or 120 K more memory > > than before udis86. I hope that's ok. But if you see ways to shave a > > few pages off by dropping code from udis86, I wouldn't be too unhappy :} > > Hmm, I only tested on top of msys2 (which is on gcc 13.3.0), but here's > what I see: > > $ ls -l > total 47952 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 XXX None 24682293 Apr 1 10:14 postmsys-2.0.dll > -rwxr-xr-x 1 XXX None 24417887 Apr 1 10:12 premsys-2.0.dll > > $ echo $(( $(stat -c %s postmsys-2.0.dll) - $(stat -c %s premsys-2.0.dll) )) > 264406 > > $ strip premsys-2.0.dll > $ strip postmsys-2.0.dll > > $ ls -l > total 6428 > -rwxr-xr-x 1 XXX None 3330598 Apr 1 10:15 postmsys-2.0.dll > -rwxr-xr-x 1 XXX None 3246118 Apr 1 10:15 premsys-2.0.dll > > $ echo $(( $(stat -c %s postmsys-2.0.dll) - $(stat -c %s premsys-2.0.dll) )) > 84480 Ah, I only ran strip -g. That explains the difference. Corinna
