On Tue, Dec 28, 1999 at 10:08:29PM +0100, Marc Lehmann wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 1999 at 03:01:04PM +0000, Seth Golub <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > install that left out (and didn't bother to compile) most of the
> > plugins. Given enough disk space, sure, I'll install whirlpinch,
> > but 55MB is more than I can afford on my school account.
> Actually, the _whole_ gimp installation on an average linux x86
> machine (MINE) takes less than 13MB.
My recent CVS GIMP build is almost 17 megs.
du -ksc `find /usr/local -name *gimp*` gives
me a total of 17296.
That's compiled with pgcc 2.95.3, CFLAGS='-s -O6 -march=pentium',
In any case it's much smaller than 55MB!
> (Note that this is no reason not to provide a minimal install, and
> something like that is already planned, but 55MB is, I think, a bit
It may be that Seth is compiling with tons of debugging information in
there, is not stripping his binaries, and is not using
It may also be that he's on a platform without shared libraries :)
> > Of course the hard part is deciding what should go in it. I could see
> It would be cool to have some configurator for this.
Yes, I think what was mentioned before was a CPAN-style repository of
plugins so that you could retrieve and install plug-ins easily. Of
course since it's the GIMP we'd have to have a pretty GTK+ front-end
and even better all uninstalled plug-ins could be listed in a menu in
the GIMP and as soon as you want to use one it will be automagically
compiled and installed.
Something for GIMP 3.0 perhaps.
-- Tom Rathborne [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- "I seem to be having tremendous difficulty with my life-style."