svn commit: r284198 - head/bin/ls

[Adrian Chadd]

On 14 June 2015 at 10:10, Steve Kargl <sgk at troutmask.apl.washington.edu> wrote:
> On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 11:22:03AM +0100, Bruce Simpson wrote:
>>
>> But I have yet to see a coherent argument here -- size(1) numbers, RSS
>> figures etc. -- about how it allegedly adds bloat. Most of what I've
>> seen so far is POLA, NIH resistance, and hand-wavery.
>>
>
> It is not alleged.  I actaully measured the bloat libxo
> caused when w(1) was converted.
>
> https://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-current/2015-March/054917.html
>
> Here's the bloat with ls(1)
>
> % ldd /bin/ls
> /bin/ls:
>         libutil.so.9 => /lib/libutil.so.9 (0x2807d000)
>         libncursesw.so.8 => /lib/libncursesw.so.8 (0x2808f000)
>         libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x280db000)
> % ll /bin/ls
> -r-xr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  - 28568 Jun  7 21:01 /bin/ls*
>
> % ldd /bin/ls
> /bin/ls:
>         libutil.so.9 => /lib/libutil.so.9 (0x2807d000)
>         libncursesw.so.8 => /lib/libncursesw.so.8 (0x2808f000)
>         libxo.so.0 => /lib/libxo.so.0 (0x280db000)
>         libc.so.7 => /lib/libc.so.7 (0x280ec000)
> laptop-kargl:kargl[204] ll /bin/ls
> -r-xr-xr-x  1 root  wheel  - 31376 Jun 14 10:06 /bin/ls*

Plus 60k for the shared library.

I don't mind that too much right now - it's around an extra 4k of
overhead per binary right now.



-adrian