[julia-users] Re: Why is Julia 0.5 built from source almost twice as large (on disk) as Julia 0.4?

2016-08-11 Thread Tomas Lycken
I'm now down to 2,2G ./julia-0.4 1,7G ./julia-0.5 which is good enough to stop the low disk space warnings :D I'll be eagerly awaiting that PR, Jameson! ;) Thanks, all! // T On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 6:19:23 PM UTC+2, Jameson wrote: > > Yes, you can delete anything old (the same

[julia-users] Re: Why is Julia 0.5 built from source almost twice as large (on disk) as Julia 0.4?

2016-08-10 Thread Jameson
Yes, you can delete anything old (the same goes for usr-staging and deps/srccache). I've also been slowly developing a PR that will allow the build system to automatically erase the build directories after its finished with them, but it's not ready yet. But someday... On Wednesday, August

[julia-users] Re: Why is Julia 0.5 built from source almost twice as large (on disk) as Julia 0.4?

2016-08-10 Thread Tomas Lycken
Thanks for the replies. Is it safe to assume that anything in deps/build that exists in multiple versions, is only needed in the latest of those? For instance, I have ``` 159M deps/build/llvm-3.3 318M deps/build/llvm-3.7.1 881M deps/build/openblas-12ab1804b6ebcd38b26960d65d254314d8bc33d6 943M

[julia-users] Re: Why is Julia 0.5 built from source almost twice as large (on disk) as Julia 0.4?

2016-08-10 Thread Kristoffer Carlsson
The .git history for LLVM is also pretty big ~ 500 MB. I also see I have 3 builds of openblas so if you have multiple of them, you could remove the unnecessary ones.

[julia-users] Re: Why is Julia 0.5 built from source almost twice as large (on disk) as Julia 0.4?

2016-08-10 Thread Andreas Lobinger
Hello colleague, On Wednesday, August 10, 2016 at 10:11:46 AM UTC+2, Tomas Lycken wrote: > > Both instances of Julia are runnable, so I don’t think I deleted something > I shouldn’t have in either folder. > > What has changed to make Julia 0.5 so big? Are there any build artifacts I >