too big binaries

[Rich Felker]

On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 11:51:07PM +0100, Piotr Rotter wrote:
> Thank you for answer. I do not except that binaries on webside are
> compiled with uclibc (not glibc) and I don't except that it's make
> that huge different. So I'll try compile uclibc and next I'll try
> compile busybox with uclibc not glibc. I hope that some tricks in
> makefile enough.

It does make a huge difference. Static linking glibc contributes at
least 500k of bloat even if you don't use any libc functions at all.
Here's some comparison data (based on my own tests, possibly mildly
biased, and also several years outdated for glibc, so glibc might
actually be larger now) which might be useful:

http://www.etalabs.net/compare_libcs.html

Rich