On Sat, Oct 17, 2015 at 7:17 PM, Dirk Hohndel <[email protected]> wrote: > >> On Oct 17, 2015, at 8:44 AM, probono <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> We make binaries for Windows and OS X. >> >> subsurface-4.5.exe for Windows is 83.5 MB in size, Subsurface-4.5.dmg >> for Mac weighs in at 38.3 MB. Both bundle not only the application >> itself, but also the required Qt libraries that the application needs >> to run. Also included are dependency libraries like libssh2.1.dylib >> and libzip.2.dylib. >> >>> We basically don't make binaries for Linux. Why? Because binaries for Linux >>> desktop applications is a major f*ing pain in the ass. Right. You don't >>> make binaries for Linux. You make binaries for Fedora 19, Fedora 20, maybe >>> there's even like RHEL 5 from ten years ago, you make binaries for debian >>> stable, or actually you don't make binaries for debian stable because >>> debian stable has libraries that are so old that anything that was built in >>> the last century doesn't work. But you might make binaries for debian... >>> whatever the codename is for unstable. And even that is a major pain >>> because (...) debian has those rules that you are supposed to use shared >>> libraries. >> >> So why not use the same approach as on Windows and OS X, namely, treat >> the base operating system as a platform on top of which we tun the >> application we care about. This means that we have to bundle the >> application with all their dependencies that are not part of the base >> operating system. Welcome application bundles, >> https://blogs.gnome.org/tvb/2013/12/10/application-bundles-for-glade/. >> >> Here https://github.com/probonopd/AppImages/releases is is an AppImage >> of Subsurface, built from the latest git sources in an automated >> process >> (https://github.com/probonopd/AppImages/blob/master/recipes/subsurface.sh). >> Just download, chmod a+x, and run. With 73.3 MB, >> Subsurface_4.5.0_x86_64.AppImage is roughly in line with the binaries >> for Windows and OS X. With some more hand-tuning, the size could >> probably be brought further down. > > This is AWESOME. I have been hoping that someone would do that. I had looked > at the AppImage stuff but just don't have the time to try all the cool stuff.
Gotta agree in here. Great job. I took a very quick glance at the AppImage, and noticed that if you strip the subsurface binary, you can shave off some of the size. However, this is not a significant as I first thought as the AppImage is compressed. You also seem to have subsurface binary there twice (under usr/bin and usr/lib), so I assume that will also shrink the package, or am I missing something. > Amazing. Wonderful. More power to you. Let's work together and create > a well tested and optimized AppImage for Subsurface-4.5 and another one > for the daily build. I suppose we should need to multiply that by two, one AppImage for 32bit and second for 64 bit systems. miika _______________________________________________ subsurface mailing list [email protected] http://lists.subsurface-divelog.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/subsurface
