large size binaries after compile on Solaris2.6?
Mark.Andrews at iengines.com
Mark.Andrews at iengines.com
Mon Dec 6 04:32:14 UTC 1999
If you were to strip the binaries you would find that they
are of a comparible size. However stripped binaries are much
harder to debug if you have problems.
Mark
> Hi all,
> I just complied and configured bind8.2.2p5 in what I thought to be
> successfully on a solaris 2.6 sun box. But after completing my testing I
> noticed a fair bit of disk space had been chewed up. Initial comparison
> between file sizes on my Sun box to those on a test RH6.0 box showed those
> on the sun box to be a fair bit larger eg:
>
> sun:
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root staff 7145336 Nov 1 05:06 named
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root staff 6463 Nov 1 05:06 named-bootconf
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root staff 5049996 Nov 1 05:06 named-xfer
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root staff 447452 Nov 1 05:06 ndc
>
> rh6.0:
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 531728 Mar 31 1999 named
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 6463 Jun 21 15:25 named-bootconf
> -rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 280928 Mar 31 1999 named-xfer
> -rwsr-xr-x 1 root root 38368 Mar 31 1999 ndc
>
> Note: the binaries on the rh6.0 box are those that came with the dist. and
> don't support named -version but show as 8.2 in the log file
>
> When compiling I just followed the instructions
>
> make stdlinks
> make clean
> make depend
> make all
> make install
>
> and didn't change anything in port/solaris
>
> Is this large file size normal or should I have compiled it in a different
> manner?
>
> regards
>
> ashley martin
>
>
--
Mark Andrews, Internet Engines Inc. / Internet Software Consortium
1 Seymour St., Dundas Valley, NSW 2117, Australia
PHONE: +61 2 9871 4742 INTERNET: Mark_Andrews at iengines.com
More information about the bind-users
mailing list