Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!julius.cs.uiuc.edu!ux1.cso.uiuc.edu!uxa.cso.uiuc.edu!dslg0849
From: dslg0849@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Daniel S. Lewart)
Newsgroups: comp.binaries.ibm.pc.d
Subject: Re: Infoplus 135
Message-ID: <1990Dec10.184657.9413@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu>
Date: 10 Dec 90 18:46:57 GMT
References: <1990Dec7.121658.25371@aplcen.apl.jhu.edu> <wokXT3w163w@infopls.UUCP> <2505@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> <1821@umriscc.isc.umr.edu>
Sender: news@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu (News)
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Lines: 18

mcastle@mcs213d.cs.umr.edu (Mike Castle (Nexus)) writes:

> How much does linking in ALL the *.bgi files into the .exe affect the size?
> Which would be a better deal:  one .exe file with all the *.bgi files, or
> multiple *.exe files, each with a different (and hard coded calls to) *.bgi
> file?  The single *.exe file would be more convenient, but possibly very 
> large.  Separate *.exe files would be more system dependent, but once the 
> user installed just the single *.exe he needs, then he'll save some disk
> space.  Essentially, it's a trade off between ease of use and storage space.
>
> Maybe a package with both types, and letting the user decide??

With Turbo Pascal, there is also the option of registering and overlaying the
.BGI and .CHR files.  Overlaying will create a .OVR file in addition to the
.EXE file.

Daniel Lewart
d-lewart@uiuc.edu