Re: Pack200 compression of packaged jars
Am 01.05.2013 19:45, schrieb Emmanuel Bourg:
> Le 01/05/2013 19:10, Matthias Klose a écrit :
>
>> so what is the difference in size for the .deb files, both with
>> unmodified jars, and packed jars?
>
> For libcommons-jexl2-java packing the jar saved about 70% of the size of
> the original .deb
thanks for checking. I assume that xz or bz2 compression won't help there either?
>> Plus, you don't have and checksum for the unpacked files on the system
>> anymore. The pack format makes sense for web applications which are
>> downloaded from the net, but I don't see a big value in doing this for a
>> Debian package.
>
> Well, isn't a 70% reduction of the size of all Java packages a substantial
> gain? And they are also downloaded from the net.
otoh not having the hashsums is a substantial loss.
> The openjdk packages could also benefit from this compression. If I'm not
> mistaken rt.jar is not packed in the .deb file, unlike the Windows JRE/JDK
> installer.
no way. Having the interpreter/runtime only available after configure time,
and not just after unpack time makes the installation of packages more complex
and does break upgrades in some ways. Just look back at the python-support
and python-central times when these symlinks were created at configure time.
Today the only thing which is done for python packages at configure time is to
byte compile .py files, which is an optimization only. The packages are usable
without it as well.
Matthias
Reply to: