MozillaZine

11-28 is leaner!

Discussion about official Mozilla Firefox builds
JEdwardP
 
Posts: 78
Joined: November 28th, 2002, 12:46 am

Post Posted November 28th, 2002, 11:09 am

This build is noticeably smaller than the first several I tried. Good job, folks. Keep trimming the fat wherever you can.

Jim

ehume

User avatar
 
Posts: 6741
Joined: November 17th, 2002, 12:33 pm
Location: Princeton, NJ, USA

Post Posted November 28th, 2002, 1:10 pm

6825 KB to 6224 KB in just 2 days (Win32 distros, 2002-11-26 to -28 ). The 2002-11-01 was 7224KB. That's a approximately a megabyte in 4 weeks!

Also, I noticed that the 2002-11-28 distro is based on the 1.3a Mozilla version.

Ed
Last edited by ehume on November 28th, 2002, 8:47 pm, edited 1 time in total.

scratch

User avatar
 
Posts: 4942
Joined: November 6th, 2002, 1:27 am
Location: Massachusetts

Post Posted November 28th, 2002, 2:05 pm

they've all been based on "1.3a" since 1.2 branched, because the trunk is now considered to be 1.3a.

Blake
 
Posts: 198
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 4:12 pm
Location: Mountain View, CA

Post Posted November 28th, 2002, 10:01 pm

We expect the Windows build will be somewhere between 5 and 5.5 mb by 1.0.

michal017
 
Posts: 307
Joined: November 5th, 2002, 12:08 am
Location: EU

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 1:33 am

actually 11/28 linux build is a bit bigger than 11/26 - 9161885 and 9161613
but I'm not worrying about it.. the size WILL decrease..

aebrahim
 
Posts: 1234
Joined: November 10th, 2002, 2:47 am
Location: Hong Kong

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 2:13 am

Blake wrote:We expect the Windows build will be somewhere between 5 and 5.5 mb by 1.0.


Not bad! That's about how big Netscape 3 was when it was released. We're getting a lot more browser per megabyte here. ;)

djst
Moderator

User avatar
 
Posts: 2826
Joined: November 5th, 2002, 1:34 am
Location: Sweden

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 5:54 am

Blake wrote:We expect the Windows build will be somewhere between 5 and 5.5 mb by 1.0.


That's great news! I remember you said (pre 0.3) that it was unlikely to get under 6.0 mb. :)
This is just getting better and better.

aarem
 
Posts: 119
Joined: November 13th, 2002, 9:23 pm

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 9:08 am

michal017 wrote:actually 11/28 linux build is a bit bigger than 11/26 - 9161885 and 9161613
but I'm not worrying about it.. the size WILL decrease..


I am just curious -- why are linux builds so much larger than windows?

Best!

Piel

User avatar
 
Posts: 216
Joined: November 11th, 2002, 4:26 pm
Location: Boston, MA

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 12:55 pm

Blake wrote:We expect the Windows build will be somewhere between 5 and 5.5 mb by 1.0.


That unto its own will make it a "killer app"....a lean, mean, oh so customizable browsing machine. SWEETNESS!

tve
Moderator
 
Posts: 3275
Joined: November 6th, 2002, 12:07 pm
Location: Federal Republic of Germany

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 1:26 pm

the latest nightly is over 1MB smaller than 0.4 :D

asa

User avatar
 
Posts: 684
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 4:16 pm
Location: CA

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 5:16 pm

aarem wrote:
michal017 wrote:actually 11/28 linux build is a bit bigger than 11/26 - 9161885 and 9161613
but I'm not worrying about it.. the size WILL decrease..


I am just curious -- why are linux builds so much larger than windows?

Best!


Build issues. Some bugs need to be fixed before linux can take advantage of the latest build changes that saved us some static size on win32.

--Asa
"You'd PAY to know what you REALLY think." --Dobbs 1961

aarem
 
Posts: 119
Joined: November 13th, 2002, 9:23 pm

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 8:16 pm

asa wrote:
aarem wrote:
michal017 wrote:actually 11/28 linux build is a bit bigger than 11/26 - 9161885 and 9161613
but I'm not worrying about it.. the size WILL decrease..


I am just curious -- why are linux builds so much larger than windows?

Best!


Build issues. Some bugs need to be fixed before linux can take advantage of the latest build changes that saved us some static size on win32.

--Asa


Thanks! So there is actually a chance that a Linux build may ultimately end up almost as small as Windows, is there? Thats great!

Best wishes!

asa

User avatar
 
Posts: 684
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 4:16 pm
Location: CA

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 9:55 pm

aarem wrote:Thanks! So there is actually a chance that a Linux build may ultimately end up almost as small as Windows, is there? Thats great!

Best wishes!

Linux builds have always been larger than windows. I don't see that changing. But the difference in size hopefully won't be this large always.

--Asa
"You'd PAY to know what you REALLY think." --Dobbs 1961

aarem
 
Posts: 119
Joined: November 13th, 2002, 9:23 pm

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 9:59 pm

asa wrote:
aarem wrote:Thanks! So there is actually a chance that a Linux build may ultimately end up almost as small as Windows, is there? Thats great!

Best wishes!

Linux builds have always been larger than windows. I don't see that changing. But the difference in size hopefully won't be this large always.

--Asa


OK, thanks! Actually it does not matter whether it is larger or smaller than windows. But from an academic point of view, why is this the case? Is it because windows has more of the gui tools available, because everything is sort of gui-based about it, as opposed to linux/unix which you can actually run fine in line mode?

Best wishes!

asa

User avatar
 
Posts: 684
Joined: November 4th, 2002, 4:16 pm
Location: CA

Post Posted November 29th, 2002, 10:07 pm

aarem wrote:
asa wrote:
aarem wrote:Thanks! So there is actually a chance that a Linux build may ultimately end up almost as small as Windows, is there? Thats great!

Best wishes!

Linux builds have always been larger than windows. I don't see that changing. But the difference in size hopefully won't be this large always.

--Asa


OK, thanks! Actually it does not matter whether it is larger or smaller than windows. But from an academic point of view, why is this the case? Is it because windows has more of the gui tools available, because everything is sort of gui-based about it, as opposed to linux/unix which you can actually run fine in line mode?

Best wishes!

I'd guess that the microsoft compiler is better than the linux compiler.
--Asa
"You'd PAY to know what you REALLY think." --Dobbs 1961

Return to Firefox Builds


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Edds and 3 guests