 | | Re: ldglite (ldlite for OpenGL and Linux) new stuff —Todd Lehman
|
| | | (...) Weird. It was looking for the object libraries at runtime, yet the filesize was wicked huge. (I wonder what's up with that? It should only be a few Kb in size.) Now I just linked it a different way -- closer to what the Mesa demos do -- and it (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: ldglite (ldlite for OpenGL and Linux) new stuff —Don Heyse
|
| | | | libtool eh? What the heck is that? I seem to have it in /usr/local/bin but "man libtool" turns up nothing. I guess I'll have to read the man pages on gcc and ld to find out more about the shared libs vs static linking switches. Oh well, I was gonna (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: ldglite (ldlite for OpenGL and Linux) new stuff —Don Heyse
|
| | | | (...) Actually I'm not quite as impressed as I was a few minutes ago. I checked the size of the executable in the zip file and it's only 81064 bytes. The bloat we saw was the debugging symbols. You can remove them with this. strip ldglite I now (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: ldglite (ldlite for OpenGL and Linux) new stuff —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) Whoa -- the ldglite I produced via libtool is an sh wrapper for .libs/ldglite produced by ltmain.sh (part of libtool I guess). That's how it's so small! :) 3k seemed awful small to me too -- almost unbelievable. 20k I could believe easily, 3k (...) (25 years ago, 26-Jan-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| | | | |
