I can make your gcj-compiled binaries much smaller.

Thu Jan 16 09:37:00 GMT 2003

Dhek Bhun Kho writes:
 > 
 > > Oh yeah, and it's a great thing. Trouble is, you're threatening to
 > > make static linkage useful! That means people will use it, and then
 > > ... we have support headaches.
 > Why does it make support worse? 
It breaks a subset of Java, as I explained earler in the thread.
 > I did find static linkage a lot easier to port apps. The bzipped size of
 > a static ant is just 3 MB, and it reduces startup time immensely (like
 > 400%). I know classes get left out if you use a static library to link
 > the binary, but I just passed all the object files to the linker. The
 > only classes that can gcj can 'forget' are from the gcj distribution
 > itself, which are supposed to be contained withing the libgcj-3.x.jar
 > isn't it?
No, they're not. The compiled gcj classes are in libgcj.a and libgcj.so.

Andrew.