From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Bloat in the Emacs Windows package Date: Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:39:52 -0400 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="87902"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 17 14:41:02 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 1hGjs5-000Miu-IL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 14:41:01 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52004 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGjs4-0000OB-FC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:41:00 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48077) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGjrW-0000O4-K9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:40:27 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGjrL-0004h9-9L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:40:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=58684 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGjrD-0004UN-Cq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 08:40:10 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hGjr6-000Lcw-07 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Apr 2019 14:40:00 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:pupgQd7KrC9JuUqt84j5duBgRR8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:235570 Archived-At: > Some people want the binary zip to include all the optional features that > Emacs on Windows can support. This zip includes all of the dependencies for > those optional features. Arguably, some of the auxiliary files, like header > files and import libraries, could be omitted, but determining which ones are > required is a very non-trivial and time-consuming job, so I can understand > why Phillip, who volunteered to produce the binary zips, didn't do that. > This "one cannot fit all" problem is why we also have the bare-minimum zip > with only the dependencies that are absolutely required. Indeed. But I wonder about licensing issues of some of those binaries: for those packages which are (L)GPL'd, do we distribute the corresponding source somewhere, like the license requires us to do? >> addpm.exe 577 kB => 2 282 kB >> ctags.exe 956 kB => 3 245 kB >> emacs.exe 8 989 kB => 121 740 kB >> emacs-24.5.exe 8 989 kB => 121 740 kB (emacs-26.1.exe) > Stripping emacs.exe produces a 29MB file for Emacs 26.2. I wonder what caused the 9MB => 29MB jump between 24.5 and 26? > We don't provide any shell scripts or batch files because the build on Posix > systems doesn't. Once again, it's hard to blame volunteers for using the > build products as is, without adding any more work. FWIW, I think saving a 100MB is worth the extra work. (but, indeed, using hard-links is the better option when available: I often just `rm src/emacs-[0-9]*` to get rid of old Emacs releases it'd be much trickier to do if src/emacs were a script that runs src/emacs-27.0.50.5). Stefan