On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 14:50 -0400, Adam Jackson wrote:
On Mon, 2012-05-14 at 13:48 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> I'm still a bit baffled that a 3.5 MB increase on a 700MB live image
> is considered a complete showstopper. That's one git package, for example;
> I would hope that creative dependency trimming can find that space.
> (Or reorganization of boot images, for example.)
There's a modest amount of low-hanging fruit if people really cared
about image size. For example, here's a way to shrink the
(uncompressed) live filesystem by 30M:
I do find the concern for difficult install scenarios to be noble, but I
would tend to class that as a different problem from producing a useful
live image that also happens to be installable. But clearly the
objection here is about "doing more work" more than "changing the image
Well, the desktop team has said for a while that the thing they'd really
want to add to the desktop image if they had more room is LibreOffice,
but that requires substantially more than a few dozen MB. Basically,
they consider saving a small amount of room to be more trouble than it's
worth in most cases, but saving or creating a large amount of room to be
very valuable, as it would allow the re-introduction of an office suite.
AIUI, anyway. As it stands, the desktop image is actually usually
several MB under 700, but not enough to put LO back in.
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora