From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?UTF-8?Q?Bj=C3=B6rn_Lindqvist?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bloat in the Emacs Windows package Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:44:09 +0200 Message-ID: References: <83a7gofv94.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="71700"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 19 01:54:03 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hHGqx-000IZW-Ld for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:54:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48810 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hHGqw-0001Dz-Gs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:54:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:56847) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hHGqm-0000pT-0y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:53:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hHGe5-0003TY-BW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:40:46 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2e]:37446) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hHGe3-0003S3-MU; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 19:40:43 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-vs1-xe2e.google.com with SMTP id w13so2079718vsc.4; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:40:43 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5i4G1guoTuqLW7Oh8eEv6DnGYaM9KbzadYjPYNueQh8=; b=AJXd26Q+PqD5VcKh/BPnD/GMff7801M7pjSmLonKQ7Sr+3RQM4hsCRu4ATwSseAh28 v9AgwpTYQHc8jN1FeeycsrdEDZxjSowKsUzcY7zy0FcU+/FGb1/GH9cC4eSC6QK0A5It kthTSodTxe7P/4ICu1QC8msJvO8nNuO7GIQnVFBv/lWL4/77lSfMLSLhLJtF7NZo+CnM 2VvlpH9x1oJI3zgX/0GTQjOUqlyO2cOE7LVg6VspTm4+HD/9rTwzFscc7mXp3u+H+hx9 5LyavJywLqkcNaHjPVWqHJ7dRbvKCYGWWBOnnm7DbrGLy39W3DY5DIJV8Ic7djOHeZ+B L1ww== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=5i4G1guoTuqLW7Oh8eEv6DnGYaM9KbzadYjPYNueQh8=; b=NwzcvPgfV3lDT4rSJtEtrJU1hSmDiYcyufn+nhaaEDAT4MVSsD4o8Ndfry97RsplYO tEJoHZftKvb7m4yascPYkuILl/E31p/YvEMSBS21jtUbIP3JzhVzLubASa/Wk5sEHtP3 Sos5M+zGs5Zh53ngIkU+3mP1OCu+rGQO9sRRIqoS6NwYuqoHHXBCxmNPN/GgjQek0hx5 tE/eZnykj1F8QXt2Bb2BwuGQdDIT0Kq6sxQ2W4tU96nN4yAl4ORNH/k/TVdRQK7bA7u5 7sl9XqD8WpkNLPJ0t5R0ywQ/pV6V5ots6zKq/r3InSU5r4tl1IdQIXV1+HUqT2qdlKSN C4Yw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAVzpRiIik2IJMCu8Bt6gCRIjRq/mITeHFR1ThgBBpX0WP6AC79c exTxkbzzmIRgX7Huz3xmDKJZ1EvMjz2YnsKccANobgsZ X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwxbSG7DfMT5NaPiRIKUAcwDgctrYB5aoTBea8I/nY5xlq7UAWYQ7g869fyBSRpgZxZUW3Lk1I6/BZ4Zg+D8wg= X-Received: by 2002:a67:ce0a:: with SMTP id s10mr381271vsl.238.1555630842134; Thu, 18 Apr 2019 16:40:42 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <83a7gofv94.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2607:f8b0:4864:20::e2e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:235639 Archived-At: Den ons 17 apr. 2019 kl 18:32 skrev Eli Zaretskii : > > > Some people want the binary zip to include all the optional features > > > that Emacs on Windows can support. > > > > Fair enough. But what optional features are missing from the > > -no-deps.zip file? > > All of them. Image support beyond XPM, SSL/TLS connections, HTML and > XML parsing, built-in decompression, built-in JSON support. Are all those dependencies necessary? Even on gnu/linux distros (like Arch Linux, Ubuntu, ...) when you install Emacs it doesn't require all that. And on that OS other packages likely to be installed already depends on some dependencies (like libgdk-pixbuf2.0) so the "dependency burden" is shared among lots of software. > > > Stripping emacs.exe produces a 29MB file for Emacs 26.2. > > > > But why is it four times bigger than in 24.5? > > Because the disk image includes a large array which is used only in > its small part. Apparently it's the same on gnu/linux. > > Because if you compile it with more optimizations (-O2 or -O3), > > the debugging symbols becomes less useful as stack frames > > disappear and -fomit-frame-pointer makes it harder for gdb to > > inspect the stack. > > Having symbols even in an optimized build is better than not having > them. But my point is that you cannot optimize the build completely while still having usable debugging symbols. If you use -O3 then gcc's inlining of stack frames and other transformations make the debugging symbol data close to useless. Even with -O2 you get lots of "" parameters and some missing stack frames. I.e the worst of both worlds; neither full optimizations nor full debugging symbols. I dunno if it would make a difference for Emacs, but other projects I've benchmarked ran noticeably faster when compiled with -O3 over -O2. Especially CPU bound tasks like elisp compilation would perhaps run faster. > And I don't think Phillip uses -fomit-frame-pointer, because it's a > net loss. Why? In my limited experience it enables gcc to produce significantly better code on the register starved x86 32 bit architecture. > > I must admit I have a hard time formulating why I think avoiding > > bloat is important, it just seem self-evident. > > Not disk space. Bloat of memory footprint, yes. I disagree and think that both disk space and memory footprint is important to keep small. Most gnu/linux distributors think the same because they strip the emacs executables even though it makes it harder to debug crashes. > > Emacs is also supposed to be usable on old operating systems and old > > hardware > > Which old systems are those? According to the GNU Emacs FAQ for MS Windows they are Windows 98 and Windows NT 4.0 through to Windows 8.1. It doesn't make sense claiming Windows 98 support without not also ensuring that the software fits on a hard disk a Windows 98 user would use. Hence the claim, to me, implies that there is an upper bound on how large the Emacs installation can become. -- mvh/best regards Bj=C3=B6rn Lindqvist