I just wonder if this should really be in core. The standards for core are high: it needs to be both testable and tested, and there's only so many possible options and tweaks where things can regress that we can take. On the other hand, there has not been much demand for it.
Alex On Thu, 17 Nov 2022 at 12:13, Yishai Jaffe <yishai1...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Hi Alexander, > > After some research, these are the numbers I came up with for compiling > core-image-minimal with python3-core: > > Normal compilation: > tar.bz2 - 6.6MB > squashfs-xz - 6.1MB > > With my pyc-only patch: > tar.bz2 - 5.8MB > squashfs-xz - 5.2MB > > So that's about a 15% decrease in size. > Again, this is for an image only with python3-core. Logically that would mean > that if you had an image with more python packages it would be even a bigger > percentage. > > > Yishai Jaffe > > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2022 at 5:12 PM Alexander Kanavin <alex.kana...@gmail.com> > wrote: >> >> Generally we slim down python installations by not installing all of >> the standard library, and rather having precise dependencies for >> specific modules. Can you illustrate the kind of space savings that >> can be gained in actual numbers? >> >> Another issue is that this should be supported upstream and in the >> wider python community. Is it? >> >> Alex >> >> On Sun, 13 Nov 2022 at 14:25, Federico Pellegrin <f...@evolware.org> wrote: >> > >> > >> > Hello, >> > Just as a small reference since I raised some doubts and questions in >> > Buildroot community on this: there has been also some troubles to >> > understand the correctness or not there (as I found some packages with >> > problems due to this source-less management) and this then sparked, >> > besides discussions in the Buildroot mailing list (roughly end of July / >> > beginning of August if someone interested searching there), also an issue >> > to the Python community, which albeit some discussion I think never >> > arrived to a concrete conclusion. This is the issue: >> > https://github.com/python/cpython/issues/95827 (see also the linked one >> > maybe) >> > >> > These are just my 2 cents to this discussion, then of course the Python >> > experts will probably chime in and describe the official/discussed >> > position of Yocto regarding to this, but just felt like mentioning that >> > although Buildroot is somehow offering this right now (and likely mostly >> > works as well!), it's not really a so clean and/or agreed solution. >> > >> > Cheers, >> > Federico >> > >> > Il giorno dom 13 nov 2022 alle ore 13:55 Yishai Jaffe >> > <yishai1...@gmail.com> ha scritto: >> >> >> >> Hi, >> >> I was wondering if there has been talk about support for source-less >> >> python on an image. Installing py and pyc files doubles the size of >> >> python on the rootfs. I can imagine this being implemented as an image >> >> feature. >> >> I know that in buildroot it is supported. >> >> Was this discussed and decided against? Is this an open issue? >> >> I have a working patch that implements this. I can submit it for review. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> Yishai Jaffe >> >> >> >> >> >> >> > >> > >> >
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#58580): https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/message/58580 Mute This Topic: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/mt/94997538/21656 Group Owner: yocto+ow...@lists.yoctoproject.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.yoctoproject.org/g/yocto/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
