Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote: > On Fri, 2008-08-15 at 00:44 +0100, Calum Benson wrote: >>> For example, the 192x192 nimbus icons are 4+ MB all by themselves... >> Yep, I'd certainly have no issues with splitting out the 96x96 sizes >> and upwards. Icons bigger than 48x48 are rarely needed on most >> desktops, but we might want to keep the next size up (72x72) just in >> case-- they might be called into play on big hi-res displays. >> >> (Even the large print themes don't ship anything bigger than 48x48, >> although their design means they do scale up a little better, when >> called upon to do so.) > > Okay, so I have some good news and some bad news. I split > the icons 96x96 and larger from SUNWgnome-themes into > SUNWgnome-themes-hires. That saved 6452k (uncompressed). > This is the good news. The bad news is that in GNOME 2.23.x > SUNWgnome-themes is larger than what's in Dave's cd space > analysis so the new compressed SUNWgnome-themes is > 20890914 (compared to 19893669 in Dave's doc). After > optimizing it with pngcrush, the compressed size is still > 19312549, so that's 570k saved but not the megs we were > hoping to get. Also, I won't be able to optimize the > package until pngcrush is pushed through the process > (ARC, legal, etc...) >
That's depressing. What's the reason for all the growth? Dave
