I think that vendors did not go the bootstrap way because it is a lot more difficult to implement than a bunch of scripts to unload packages.
On Sun, Mar 4, 2018 at 11:53 AM, Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-users <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------- > From: Benoit St-Jean <bstj...@yahoo.com> > To: Any question about pharo is welcome <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org>, > Esteban Lorenzano <esteba...@gmail.com> > Cc: Hilaire <hila...@drgeo.eu> > Bcc: > Date: Sun, 4 Mar 2018 10:53:04 +0000 (UTC) > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Ever growing image > Estaban, > > I understand the difference between the 2 approaches my point was just to > mention that I guess there are some advantages to shrink the image (as > compared to bootstrapping from a minimal image) since all major vendors used > that approach (and are still using it). It's just that I was curious to know > if anyone knows any paper/document/study comparing the 2 approaches or > explaining in detail both of them. I googled for a few hours but couldn't > find anything... > > > ----------------- > Benoît St-Jean > Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean > Twitter: @BenLeChialeux > Pinterest: benoitstjean > Instagram: Chef_Benito > IRC: lamneth > Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com > "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) > > > On Sunday, March 4, 2018, 5:13:30 AM EST, Esteban Lorenzano > <esteba...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 3 Mar 2018, at 16:35, Benoit St-Jean via Pharo-users > <pharo-users@lists.pharo.org> wrote: > > > From: Benoit St-Jean <bstj...@yahoo.com> > Subject: Re: [Pharo-users] Ever growing image > Date: 3 March 2018 at 16:35:19 CET > To: pharo-users@lists.pharo.org, Hilaire <hila...@drgeo.eu> > Reply-To: Benoit St-Jean <bstj...@yahoo.com> > > > On a side note, being a long-time VW & VAST user, I've always felt the Image > Stripper & Runtime Packager did a fairly good job at removing crap from the > resulting image. > > I don't recall ready anything substantial comparing the Pharo way > (bootstrapping from a minimal image and adding stuff) to the VW & VAST way > (removing unreferenced stuff) but this would definitely be an interesting > topic to read about. > > > > No idea if any “substantial" thing has been written (there are some phds > around that may talk about), but main difference is very simple to explain: > first approach (which was the same for Pharo before) is non-deterministic > while the second is. Then, for purpose of repeatability of process (and > testing, etc.) bootstrapping is better. > You would not know the amount of effort made to make this possible, it > required at least 2 phd works and a considerable amount of engineering effort. > In our community, Pavel is the person that has the bigger experience on > shrinking process images. I followed his work for years and I know the > fragility of the process. Basically each new addition/removal was breaking it > and needing dependency tracking, etc. Now is the opposite: you just add what > you want, and you are sure the resulting image is a) healthy and b) identical > when running. > > Esteban > > > ----------------- > Benoît St-Jean > Yahoo! Messenger: bstjean > Twitter: @BenLeChialeux > Pinterest: benoitstjean > Instagram: Chef_Benito > IRC: lamneth > Blogue: endormitoire.wordpress.com > "A standpoint is an intellectual horizon of radius zero". (A. Einstein) > > > On Saturday, March 3, 2018, 9:22:06 AM EST, Hilaire <hila...@drgeo.eu> wrote: > > > Le 02/03/2018 à 22:52, Marcus Denker a écrit : >> >> we should again do some analysis where space is going… the Pharo7 download >> is now 38MB (the image, decompressed). > > Situation improved :) Remember P3 was just above 20 MB > > > >
