i686 (and likely x86_64) Live image not fitting on CD

[Adam Jackson]

On Mon, 2008-09-22 at 17:56 -0700, Jesse Keating wrote:
> I'm less concerned about x86_64 for Beta, but i686 not fitting on a CD
> is a stop ship.  We're 43~megs over size.  That's not a small amount.
> This may have been brought up before, but I don't see archives of it so
> it may have been IRC only.
> 
> http://jkeating.fedorapeople.org/alpha2beta-live-diff has a listing of
> the package differences between Alpha and Beta.  I would really
> appreciate some help looking for something to cut for size, since you
> guys are supposed to own this config now.
> 
> http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-live-base.ks;h=55f57cf0a7ebf60326c5eabf968b0d4b2dfd4975;hb=refs/heads/F-10-Beta
> 
> http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livecd-desktop.ks;h=371ad17a34667b60fe0fab63a3e9876245c7da9e;hb=refs/heads/F-10-Beta
> 
> and
> 
> http://git.fedorahosted.org/git/?p=spin-kickstarts.git;a=blob;f=fedora-livecd-desktop-default.ks;h=e7a91937f1eb87df3d5197f6ea6cf2918ca986fb;hb=refs/heads/F-10-Beta
> 
> are the configs used.

Not that it's much by way of disk size, but it looks like a lot of the X
libs got measurably bigger for no particularly good reason.  libXrandr,
for example, got almost 40% bigger purely because the ChangeLog in
%doc got three times bigger.

Do we care that much about including these?  I can't see that they're
worth much even on a real system.

In related news, the rpm changelog for initscripts is over 100k and goes
back to 1997, which does affect disk size since the live image includes
a real rpmdb.  glibc is even worse at about 120k, though it only goes
back to 2000.

- ajax
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-desktop-list/attachments/20080923/6b283ad3/attachment.sig>