News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead of dynamic ones? (2004). Parent comment

Re:Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead ... by jacquesm on Friday February 15, 2019 @09:38AM (#19171217)
You want -flto and to strip the binary of symbols if you are looking for a small executable size. The C runtime is about 800K.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Why has Plan 9 chosen statically linked binaries instead ... by tom_mellior on Friday February 15, 2019 @09:53AM (#19171334)
-flto combined with -static doesn't seem to do anything for me:

    $ gcc -O3 foo.c -flto -static -o foo
    $ du -sh foo
    828K foo
    $ strip foo
    $ du -sh foo
    760K foo
Could you post a complete command line and the version of the compiler you have showing how to make this work with static linking?
[ Parent | on HN ]