Re: [Bug-gnubg] Did I just mess up?

[Øystein O Johansen]

> But on the other hand: in <glib/gutils.h> both
> g_path_get_dirname/g_path_get_basename are defined. Why not use these? Or

> are there really systems left without glib?

I really didn't think about these functions for the GTK+ builds.
For the none gui builds, I like to keep the executable small and
independent of many dlls. I therefore exclude unnecesarry features
(unnecesarry in my opinion that is) from the no gui build. I
exclude png+freetype+libart+zlib, i18n, gdbm and sound. The only
non-standard dlls gnubg-no-gui is depending on is libxml.dll and
now python22.dll. readline support is linked statically.

When I choose to make simplelibgen files it just to keep the
dependencies to a minimum. And the object file of simplelibgen is
332 bytes at my compile but the glib.dll is 613 kb in addition to
the other dependencies iconv.dll and libintl.dll

So, for the no-gui build:
I can use glib functions, for a executable of ~800 kb it will suddenly
depend on 3 non-standard windows dlls which is:
613kb (glib) + 872kb (iconv) + 46kb (intl) = 1.53 MB
So I'm adding 1.53 MB of dependencies to a executable of half the size
of the additional dependencies, for only two fucking functions, dirname
and basename, which may take only 332 bytes!!

For the gui build I will make some changes to use the glib functions
instead. Thanks for pointing this out.

-Øystein




-------------------------------------------------------------------
The information contained in this message may be CONFIDENTIAL and is
intended for the addressee only. Any unauthorised use, dissemination of the
information or copying of this message is prohibited. If you are not the
addressee, please notify the sender immediately by return e-mail and delete
this message.
Thank you.