• Stefan (4/4) Jul 29 2008 I recently had to fix a little bug in an D application (win32). I though...
• Jarrett Billingsley (4/12) Jul 29 2008 Bearophile noticed this when 1.032 came out, too. There has not yet bee...
• Moritz Warning (5/15) Jul 29 2008 Is there a bug report already? I haven't found one yet.
• bearophile (6/8) Jul 29 2008 What strip do you use for this? The strip I use isn't compatible:
• Moritz Warning (2/14) Jul 29 2008 I'm on linux, works fine there.
• Stefan (4/22) Jul 29 2008 Do you have a similar effect with Linux?
• Moritz Warning (5/8) Jul 29 2008 strip removes all debugging and symbol information from a binary.
• Rakan Alhneiti (6/16) Jul 30 2008 I ran into this problem earlier as i was developing IntelliD (which is

Stefan <Stefan.Liebig compeople.de> writes:

I recently had to fix a little bug in an D application (win32). I thought that
I would also be a good idea to upgrade to the most current version of the D
compiler.
When upgrading to 1.033 from 1.025 the executable size almost tripled from 227
kb to 603 kb! After building with all version from 1.025 up I found that this
phenomenon occurs when switching from 1.031 to 1.032.

Any ideas?

Stefan

"Jarrett Billingsley" <kb3ctd2 yahoo.com> writes:

"Stefan" <Stefan.Liebig compeople.de> wrote in message 
news:g6n37d$2dhc$1 digitalmars.com...
I recently had to fix a little bug in an D application (win32). I thought 
that I would also be a good idea to upgrade to the most current version of 
the D compiler.
 When upgrading to 1.033 from 1.025 the executable size almost tripled from 
 227 kb to 603 kb! After building with all version from 1.025 up I found 
 that this phenomenon occurs when switching from 1.031 to 1.032.

 Any ideas?

 Stefan

Bearophile noticed this when 1.032 came out, too.  There has not yet been 
any resolution as far as I know. 

Moritz Warning <moritzwarning web.de> writes:

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:42:21 -0400, Stefan wrote:

 I recently had to fix a little bug in an D application (win32). I
 thought that I would also be a good idea to upgrade to the most current
 version of the D compiler. When upgrading to 1.033 from 1.025 the
 executable size almost tripled from 227 kb to 603 kb! After building
 with all version from 1.025 up I found that this phenomenon occurs when
 switching from 1.031 to 1.032.
 
 Any ideas?
 
 Stefan

Is there a bug report already? I haven't found one yet.
Such bloat is quite annoying.

Btw., you can always use "strip <program>" to reduce the binary size. Or 
even upx.

bearophile <bearophileHUGS lycos.com> writes:

Moritz Warning:
 Btw., you can always use "strip <program>" to reduce the binary size. Or 
 even upx.

What strip do you use for this? The strip I use isn't compatible:

strip:foo.exe: File format not recognized

BFD header file version (GNU Binutils) 2.18.50.20080109

Bye,
bearophile

Moritz Warning <moritzwarning web.de> writes:

On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 11:39:25 -0400, bearophile wrote:

 Moritz Warning:
 Btw., you can always use "strip <program>" to reduce the binary size.
 Or even upx.

 
 What strip do you use for this? The strip I use isn't compatible:
 
 strip:foo.exe: File format not recognized
 
 BFD header file version (GNU Binutils) 2.18.50.20080109
 
 Bye,
 bearophile

I'm on linux, works fine there.

Stefan <Stefan.Liebig compeople.de> writes:

Do you have a similar effect with Linux?
You mentioned strip, what does it exactly?

Stefan

Moritz Warning Wrote:

 On Tue, 29 Jul 2008 08:42:21 -0400, Stefan wrote:
 
 I recently had to fix a little bug in an D application (win32). I
 thought that I would also be a good idea to upgrade to the most current
 version of the D compiler. When upgrading to 1.033 from 1.025 the
 executable size almost tripled from 227 kb to 603 kb! After building
 with all version from 1.025 up I found that this phenomenon occurs when
 switching from 1.031 to 1.032.
 
 Any ideas?
 
 Stefan

 
 Is there a bug report already? I haven't found one yet.
 Such bloat is quite annoying.
 
 Btw., you can always use "strip <program>" to reduce the binary size. Or 
 even upx.

Moritz Warning <moritzwarning web.de> writes:

On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:11:27 -0400, Stefan wrote:

 Do you have a similar effect with Linux? You mentioned strip, what does
 it exactly?
 

strip removes all debugging and symbol information from a binary.
Afaik, you can't link the binary afterwards or debug it properly,
but that's often no problem for release builds.

Anyway, it's not a workaround for the increased file size.

Rakan Alhneiti <rakan.alhneiti nospam.gmail.com> writes:

Moritz Warning wrote:
 On Wed, 30 Jul 2008 02:11:27 -0400, Stefan wrote:
 
 Do you have a similar effect with Linux? You mentioned strip, what does
 it exactly?

 strip removes all debugging and symbol information from a binary.
 Afaik, you can't link the binary afterwards or debug it properly,
 but that's often no problem for release builds.
 
 Anyway, it's not a workaround for the increased file size.

I ran into this problem earlier as i was developing IntelliD (which is 
not done yet!). The file size went up to 9 MB in size, i removed -g 
-debug symbols from my compilation command and i think it went down to 7 
or 8 MB. Using UPX i managed to get it size my files down to 2.5 MB 
which is good enough for a text-editor.