On 22-May-99 Kurt Granroth wrote:
> FINAL CONCLUSION:
> Um.. I guess I don't have one.  If you are really concerned about hard drive
> space, though, then it's *definitely* worth putting in the extra flags!

Nice study !

Ok, well I think it will be a good move to use size-optimisations (that reduce
binary size) anyway on release, as it must have an effect on startup time.

If the kernel has to fetch 10M from disk instead of 20, this could help on
systems with slow disks (like laptops with small IDE drives).

My IDE drive takes just under a second to pull 10M off the platters in a
block. When KDE loads, there's a fair bit of head movement too.

If you've still got those binaries lying around, perhaps you'd do a test to see
if 'startkde' is significantly faster with the smaller ones ?

Oh yes, I nearly forgot ! The binary packages for KDE are HUGE. This will help.

There is the issue that we can't really do -no-rtti in case someone wants to
compile something for KDE that uses it. I know my compiler at least gets upset
if you forget -no-rtti when Qt is using it.

Cheers,
Rik


--
KDE - Colour outside the lines  : http://www.kde.org
[[without]] - software for KDE  : http://without.netpedia.net