My guess is that the libraries are not native and the compiler can only include them in the executable for less hassle. If you wrote a pprogram with Windows components from .Net, I assume that if you attempted to compile this for Linux, the compiler would either need to include mono or similar libraries with the executable or require that anybody installing the executable also install the mono libraries to perform the .Net functions.
Don Marang -------------------------------------------------- From: "Joseph Lee" <joseph.lee22590@xxxxxxxxx> Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 10:17 AM To: <programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> Subject: RE: Huge executables when compiling in Windows
Hi,I noticed that as well. Could it be the included libraries and/or somethingelse? Cheers, Joseph -----Original Message----- From: programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:programmingblind-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Øyvind Lode Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 2010 7:11 AM To: programmingblind@xxxxxxxxxxxxx Subject: Huge executables when compiling in Windows Hi all: I've noticed that executables are huge in Windows compared to Linux. My hello World program is 27K when compiled in Windows and 6.2K in Linux. This is C code and when I compile C++ the difference is even greater. About 488K in Windows and 7K in Linux for Hello World!! On Windows I compile with GCC 4.5.0 and on Linux it's GCC 4.3.2. Why? I'm just curious! __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - www.avg.com Version: 8.5.441 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3001 - Release Date: 07/12/10 16:49:00 __________ View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
__________View the list's information and change your settings at //www.freelists.org/list/programmingblind
