Date: Sat, 15 Jun 2002 19:06:43 +0300
From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender: halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Message-Id: <2593-Sat15Jun2002190642+0300-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9
In-reply-to: <10206131551.AA17658@clio.rice.edu> (sandmann@clio.rice.edu)
Subject: Re: DJGPP 2.04
References:  <10206131551 DOT AA17658 AT clio DOT rice DOT edu>
Reply-To: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

> From: sandmann AT clio DOT rice DOT edu
> Date: Thu, 13 Jun 2002 10:51:14 -0500 (CDT)
> 
> One of the concerns I've had (and heard from others) is the size and
> speed of CVS images vs current 2.03.

Any details?  I only know about the size bloat when libiconv is
linked into the binary, for i18n.