From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] dumb question
From: rog@vitanuova.com
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20020626185906.CC8B2199BC@mail.cse.psu.edu>
Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 20:04:41 +0100
Topicbox-Message-UUID: bab2d350-eaca-11e9-9e20-41e7f4b1d025

> cp is about 60k in plan9 and tar is 80k in plan9.  cp on 3 seperate
> unix machines (linux, SCO unix, os-X) in its overcomplicated copying
> directory tree glory is under 30k, on sunOS it happens to be 17k.

this is a little over-harsh on plan 9, i think.

to start with none of the plan 9 binaries are stripped, which takes
cp and tar down to 40K and 50K respectively. also all plan 9 binaries
are statically linked. a look at a closeby FreeBSD box gives cp at
65K statically linked and stripped, which seems like a fairer comparison.
(remembering that dynamic libraries impose their own overhead too,
when starting up a program).

mind you, a quick look at the 3rd edition cp gives 15K stripped,
and the cp source hasn't changed that much. i wonder what's using
that extra 20K of text. i suspect the new print library.

  cheers,
    rog.