On Tue, Nov 04, 2003 at 10:43:07AM +0100, Stefano Zacchiroli wrote: > Sven Luther said: > >> Anyway I'm wondering if it's better to ship a new ocaml-interp package > >> or move the stuff you mention in your patch from ocaml to ocaml-base > >> ... Moving the stuff shouldn't break anything since packages depending > >> on ocaml-base still have in it all they need as well as package > >> needing ocaml (since it depends on ocaml-base). > > Well, the main turning point is that ocaml as interpreter stays a > > marginal thing, and adding the toplevel and its libs will make > > ocmal-base bigger, maybe too big ? > > > > ocaml-base installed size is 400Ko, while the interpreter stuff is > > above 3Mo. > > Do you think this difference is worth creating a new package? Actually I > don't know the answer to this question. Maybe we can compare the size of > the resulting package (3 Mb) with the size on the other interpreters. > Actually I've no debian box at hand (crappy webmailer) but we can compare > with the size of the perl an python packages at least ... > Without doing these comparison I think that pollute the dpkg archive is > more a problem than adding 3 Mb to a package, but is just a personal view. > Cheers
Keep in mind that each bytecode package would requite this. Currently the ocaml-base package is 156678 on x86, i guess that the the ocaml-interp package would be 1Mo more or less, that is acounting for a 1/3 compression ratio, maybe it will be a bit more though, don't know. So, if you want to run ledit, you would need to download 1Mo of packages, instead of just 150Ko + 27Ko of ledit. That said, ledit is only an about 100Ko executable, i wonder what David put in its scripts to make them 500+ Ko like he said. Friendly, Sven Luther
