3 Feb
2012
3 Feb
'12
4:47 a.m.
On Feb 2, 2012, at 3:29 PM, Tim Newsham wrote:
No. I'm not kidding.
Remember that these systems exist in more places than on monster-sized hard-disks.
Embedded systems had limits of 4MB, 8MB or 16MB when these patches were done. While NAND
has grown so that 64MB or 256MB parts are more common on boards, the savings is still
rather substantial and allow for additional functionality. The space savings rivals
'crunchgened' binaries (think busybox). Savings between 32MB and 64MB is only a
few $$$, but if you ship a million of something, the savings can be substantial.
In addition, having everything link in shared libraries makes doing security updates much
easier.
Warner
Thankfully,
most binaries are dynamic these days, which saves a ton of space on / (as a percentage of
what's used).
you're kidding, right? Disk space of binaries?
(I still wish "du" had a "-$" flag that pulled info from a recent
price
database).