On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 03:52:41PM +0200, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > On Mon, Apr 09, 2007 at 03:12:48PM +0200, Sven Luther wrote: > > This would strongly hint at a behaviour of always including the debug > > symbols > > in libraries, and since the .cmo/.cma are in the -dev file anyway, this > > would > > not impose a size penalty on the normal user at all. > > > > Do we have an idea of how much the size increase is ? > > I tested that on extlib, and I'm quite scared by the result: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ ls -l *deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 zack zack 297300 2007-04-09 15:27 > libextlib-ocaml-dev_1.5-6_i386.deb > -rw-r--r-- 1 zack zack 529000 2007-04-09 15:34 > libextlib-ocaml-dev_1.5-7_i386.deb > > As expected the changelog entry for -7 is: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ dpkg-parsechangelog | tail -2 > * compile objects with debugging information, patch from Ivan Jager > (Closes: #415194) > > Some more details: > > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ dpkg --info *-6*.deb | grep -i size > size 297300 bytes: control archive= 4908 bytes. > Installed-Size: 1808 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ dpkg --info *-7*.deb | grep -i size > size 529000 bytes: control archive= 4907 bytes. > Installed-Size: 2280 > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ dpkg-deb -x *-6*.deb no_debug/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ dpkg-deb -x *-7*.deb debug/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ du -sh no_debug/usr/lib/ocaml/3.09.2/extlib/ > 840K no_debug/usr/lib/ocaml/3.09.2/extlib/ > [EMAIL PROTECTED]:$ du -sh debug/usr/lib/ocaml/3.09.2/extlib/ > 1,3M debug/usr/lib/ocaml/3.09.2/extlib/ > > About 50% more in the size of OCaml objects, that's *a lot*. IMO this is > enough of an argument to give up the idea, and also to strip the > standard library, but maybe we should ask for the opinions of the > release managers / the cd team.
Well, it is a huge size increase, but how many libraries are affected ? What is the size of all the ocaml bytecode libraries in the archive ? And if you compare that to the -dbg versions of the C libraries, is it significant ? I am still in favour of always including them, i was told some time ago by someone close to the ftp-masters, that even the place gain of not rebuilding coq for all non-native arches was a minor issue, so ... Friendly, Sven Luther -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
