From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Fri Dec 10 10:15:14 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F0C3316A4CF for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:15:14 +0000 (GMT) Received: from storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (storm.uk.FreeBSD.org [194.242.157.42]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B48A43D55 for ; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:15:14 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (uucp@localhost [127.0.0.1]) by storm.uk.FreeBSD.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iBAAFCaq061615; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:15:12 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: (from uucp@localhost)iBAAFBBt061614; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:15:11 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Received: from grondar.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by grovel.grondar.org (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id iBAAEict086798; Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:14:44 GMT (envelope-from mark@grondar.org) Message-Id: <200412101014.iBAAEict086798@grovel.grondar.org> To: Colin Percival From: Mark Murray In-Reply-To: Your message of "Fri, 10 Dec 2004 01:08:02 PST." <41B96772.4010000@wadham.ox.ac.uk> Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:14:44 +0000 Sender: mark@grondar.org cc: freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Adding standalone RSA code X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 10 Dec 2004 10:15:15 -0000 Colin Percival writes: > Mark Murray wrote: > > Colin Percival writes: > >>I was comparing /usr/lib/libcrypto.a (1.7 MB on my system) to the sum > >>of the sizes of the object files built from my library code (38 kB). > >> > >>If you look at the number of lines of C files (counted using `wc -l` > >>since I don't want to bother installing sloccount), my code is 1489 > >>lines compared to openssl's 202982 lines. > > > > Do you have a version of your code linked against OpenSSL? What is the > > size difference between a static link of your code vs a static link > > against OpenSSL? > > I don't have a version using openssl, but my key generation program > (statically linked against my crypto code) is 37kB, while a program > which calls RSA_generate_key (statically linked against openssl) is > 240kB. So even under the most favourable conditions (adding overhead > to my code but not to openssl) it's a size ratio of more than 6. Hmm. I must profess to having a degree of discomfort with duplicated functionality. 240k is not a big binary, and it sounds like your applet is one that may get heavy use. Its not built for speed; how much of a problem is this? If OpenSSL grows hardware BigNum support, your app will not benefit; how will this affect the user? Is size really a concern? I can't find a disk smaller than 10 GB at my local dealer. M -- Mark Murray iumop ap!sdn w,I idlaH