[uClibc] A stupid question.

[Denis Vlasenko]

On Tuesday 01 June 2004 09:29, Henri van Riel wrote:
> >> I warned you, this is probably a stupid question... but why aren't
> >> those libraries equally big? I've checked them with readelf and the
> >> libraries are identical when it comes to included symbols and stuff,
> >> but some symbols are simply 1 or 2 bytes smaller. Why is that?
> >
> > Different compiler?
>
> Apparently the target was compiled with gcc-3.3.2, I used the same
> one.
>
> Could it be the platform? I compiled on RedHat7.3, kernel 2.4.18-3. I
> don't know where the target was compiled on, could be Debian or SuSE
> or something. Would that make any difference?
>
> My biggest question really is: Will the binaries that I compile on my
> dev system run without a problem on the target if the libraries don't
> seem to be the same? You know, can I expect binary incompatibilities
> to get in the way?

In theory, it can work fine.
In practice, it usually works. If you want to be 100% sure, well,
just try it.

I do not compile for e.g. 686 exactly because I hate when this bites
me when I occasionally run on Pentium I. ;)
-- 
vda