> From [email protected] Thu Jul 12 17:34:12 2012 > Date: Thu, 12 Jul 2012 23:31:31 +0100 > From: Anton Shterenlikht <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: profiling library smaller than non-profiling, > while it contains more symbols. Why? > > While updating my port (math/slatec) to use > the new OPTIONS framework, I did some > experiments with the profiling library. > > I don't know much about this, so what surprised me > is that the profiling library is smaller: > > # ls -al lib*a > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 6582354 Jul 12 22:56 libslatec.a > -rw-r--r-- 1 root wheel 6555122 Jul 12 23:02 libslatec_p.a > #
It it possible that libslatac.a has debggingn symbols, and the profiling library does not? Or that the profiling library was compiled with a lower degree of optimization ? (many of the 'higher'-level optimizations cause _larger_, albeit faster, code to be generated) Any other differences in compilation flags? _______________________________________________ [email protected] mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[email protected]"
