Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!udel!mmdf
From: wjb%cogsci.COG.JHU.EDU@vm1.nodak.edu
Newsgroups: comp.os.minix
Subject: Re: <minix/minlib.h> (size of distribution)
Message-ID: <53341@nigel.ee.udel.edu>
Date: 11 May 91 18:59:04 GMT
Sender: mmdf@ee.udel.edu
Lines: 18


Andy Tanenbaum wrote:
>Maybe yes, maybe no.  I don't care about how big the programs are when they
>are in memory.  What I care about is how big they are on the distribution
>disks.

	You could consider shipping object files rather then binaries for
all executables not needed for the installation of the system.  The
installation process could then link them as it copies them over to the hard
disk.  For executables that have multiple object files, linking them
together and resolving all references outside the standard library might be
useful.  I don't know if this would save space or not.  It depends on the
relative sizes of the symbol table vs. functions pulled in from the
libarary.  If only external references were left in the symbol table though,
I think it would be a win.  The advantage over implementing shared libraries
is that it doesn't require any OS changes.

				Bill Bogstad