building cmd/juju with go 1.7 tip and then stripping results in a binary that is "only" 33 MB, so there is some progress being made there too :-)
On 6 April 2016 at 17:30, John A Meinel <j...@arbash-meinel.com> wrote: > I tried stripping my 1.6 based build, and it seems to be working. (Juju > does reflection at init() time as part of some of the registries), so it > seems safe to do. On the flip side it isn't amazingly better. It seems > to be a bit less than 2:1. (73MB down to 40MB.) Almost certainly still > worth it, just doesn't compensate for the 1:10 growth of the Juju binary > itself over time. > > -- > You received this bug notification because you are subscribed to the bug > report. > https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1564662 > > Title: > Juju binaries should be stripped > > To manage notifications about this bug go to: > https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1564662/+subscriptions -- You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu Bugs, which is subscribed to Ubuntu. https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1564662 Title: Juju binaries should be stripped To manage notifications about this bug go to: https://bugs.launchpad.net/juju-core/+bug/1564662/+subscriptions -- ubuntu-bugs mailing list ubuntu-bugs@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-bugs