Em 29-08-2012 15:22, Armin K. escreveu:
> On 08/29/2012 07:24 PM, Ken Moffat wrote:
>> When xulrunner first appeared, my memory tells me that it was quite
>> a bit quicker to build only firefox, instead of building xulrunner
>> and then linking firefox to it. Of course, the instructions were
>> quite different in those days. With our current instructions,
>> building xulrunner first is both quicker and uses less space
>> (measured on 14.0.1, I haven't built 15.0 yet).
Just finished building FF standalone, to compare with FF/Xul (15.0).
$ find /usr -type d -name xulrunner\*15\* -o -type d -name firefox* 2>/dev/null
| xargs du -sck
24196 /usr/include/xulrunner-15.0
6212 /usr/share/idl/xulrunner-15.0
27884 /usr/lib/xulrunner-devel-15.0
3844 /usr/lib/firefox-15.0
30448 /usr/lib/xulrunner-15.0
92584 total
Including devel, idl, etc, FF standalone size is larger:
$ du -sck firefox-15.0
94116 firefox-15.0
94116 total
However, if I unpack
tar xf firefox-build/dist/firefox-15.0.en-US.linux-i686.tar.bz2
size is much smaller:
$ du -sck tmp/firefox-15.0
33968 tmp/firefox-15.0
and works.
FF standalone, over 22min
FF+Xul: less than 16min
Just in case, I had to use:
# Don't exit with error when some libs are missing which we have
# in system.
sed '/^MOZ_PKG_FATAL_WARNINGS/s@= 1@= 0@' \
-i browser/installer/Makefile.in
Tried with elf hacks, but still got errors, reversed without hacks and
used the sed.
>> How would people feel about making xulrunner a recommended dep of
>> firefox, and removing the instructions for how to build it on its
>> own - this would make the page rather shorter, and would
>> significantly reduce the amount of testing / measuring needed at
>> each upgrade ?
>>
>> We could, perhaps, explain that xulrunner is now recommended
>> because it gives a smaller and wuicker build.
>>
>> ĸen
>>
>
> I am for it. As far as I know, Xulrunner was once required (or
> recommended) for Firefox. It works great tough, it just needs some minor
> adjustments.
I use and prefer FF+Xul.
Is it reasonable to ask users to spend extra 58616 KB if they only need FF?
I understand the problem of testing, building, measuring, etc., so
Is it reasonable for the developer to spend that extra time/effort just
to spare some user disk space?
Perhaps, just some comments in the mozconfig and/or just before the
install instructions about the other possibility?
If a vote is necessary, I agree with you both, Ken and Armin.
--
[]s,
Fernando
--
http://linuxfromscratch.org/mailman/listinfo/blfs-dev
FAQ: http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/blfs/faq.html
Unsubscribe: See the above information page
