[Live-demo] 5.0 Beta 4 Status - Space

Mon Aug 8 03:01:44 PDT 2011

I have found the .svn dirs very useful on several occassions, also.. 
It seems interesting and functional to have the real way things are 
build, right there
OSGeo is really about source code and access to source code, so to me, 
that fits well
I really dont know if its worth throwing out the .svn dirs or not, given that

==
Brian Hamlin
GeoCal
OSGeo California Chapter
415-717-4462 cell

On Mon, 08 Aug 2011 02:03:48 -0700, Alex Mandel  wrote:
We did change from checkout to the method that doesn't create .svn
> folders but then found it making it harder for us to fix some things
> that just required svn up. I suppose in the build_iso.sh script we can
> easily add a line or two to remove the folder or just the .svn folders
> inside of it. 
>
> That sounds like a good idea since space really isn't a concern on the
> vm we give out and we do want people to see how we did the install and
> setup. It's actually a good way to learn how to do the setup, I use the
> postgis script all the time to help me do installs. 
>
> Anyone want to take charge and recursively delete .svn folders out of
> the checkout in the build_iso script (could be a separate subscript for
> modularity). 
>
> Thanks,
> Alex
>
> On 08/07/2011 11:37 PM, Frank Gasdorf wrote:
> > I really wounder about the gisvm svn folder that is still on the 
> DVD and not
> > really required for the projects I guess. IMHO I would remove these 180 MB
> > gisvm directory after successfully installation. Was it an initial thought
> > to let this folder still on it to "develop" gisvm and try install_scripts
> > after roll out? If so it should be still on it. But I guess the user who
> > wants to try any of this project do not really wants to know how to install
> > (in a specific way) the software components itself. 
> > > Any opinions?
> > > Cheers, Frank
> > > 2011/8/8 Alex Mandel <tech_dev at wildintellect.com>
> > >> On 08/07/2011 04:57 PM, Hamish wrote:
> >>> Alex wrote:
> >>>> Yes a re-audit of Xubuntu is probably in order since it's a
> >>>> different release version, I'll see if I can make a quick list
> >>>> by hand of things to remove. 
> >>>
> >>> have a look for a post by me to this list about 5-6 weeks ago
> >>> with such a list. things like a couple of 10-20mb theme packs. 
> >>>
> >>> the base xubuntu still came on a 700mb CD, so in theory will
> >>> not have grown. 
> >>>
> >>> useful things like inkscape, gimp, openoffice may have to go if
> >>> they are still there. but then we lose the ability of the disc
> >>> to be used as a general purpose enviro, so folks are more likely
> >>> to reboot out of it and not come back. 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> remember it is compressed size that matters, not what df reports,
> >>> so uncompressed GeoTiffs etc may be a lot less costly than they
> >>> seem on the surface. 
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> Hamish
> >>
> >> Yes I use a rule of thumb 50%. So 200 MB in the OS tends to be 100MB in
> >> the ISO. This has been fairly true for all of our builds in the past
> >> though currently we're shrinking 9.8 to 3.8 which is more than 50%
> >> savings. The nice part is if you don't go down to the individual file
> >> level it seems to average out compressible vs non. 
> >>
> >> Inkscape is being used in Cartography these days (I should know I did a
> >> class with it last year and my friend is giving a talk about it at
> >> FOSS4G). I believe we already removed gimp, and OOo was never on Xubuntu
> >> (though it would be nice to have Calc for editing dbf). 
> >> --
> >>
> >> Postgis:
> >> osm_local 38 MB
> >> osm_local_merc 37 MB
> >> pgrouting 181 MB
> >> sahana 21 MB
> >> mapbender 15 MB
> >> 52nSOS 20 MB
> >> natural_earth 69 MB
> >>
> >> Aside from asking pgrouting to use the same OSM dump (not sure if they
> >> switched from their premade sample) postgis seems ok on space usage. 
> >> --
> >>
> >> Packages:
> >>
> >> libboost1.42-dev  69 M <- Is this necessary after boost packages are
> >> built? maybe we need better cleanup after boost stuff. 
> >>
> >> gnome-user-guide 52 M <- Xubuntu, why do we need gnome stuff?
> >>
> >> smbclient 42.6 M <- does the live disc need to be able to browse windows
> >> shares? I can see the value of this for the vm. 
> >>
> >> openjdk-6-jdk 35 M <- is the dev kit required or is jre sufficient?
> >>
> >> oxygen-icon-theme 31 M <- looks like elementary icon is the defualt so
> >> drop this
> >> humanity-icon-theme 20.3 M <- same
> >>
> >> Looks like that's a 200+ MB savings 100 MB on the ISO, quite good for
> >> quick look. 
> >>
> >> For now the following seems safe to tack in the setdown.sh
> >> apt-get remove oxygen-icon-theme humanity-icon-theme gnome-user-guide
> >> libboost1.42-dev
> >>
> >> Language packs are another place to look after that, but I'm hesitant to
> >> have to decide between languages. They also only looks like 8 MB a piece
> >> which doesn't seem right to me - can any non-english users confirm the
> >> presence of and usability of language selection (ex, does firefox load
> >> in the chosen language)?
> >>
> >> TODO: For 5.5 try to get all the Java packages onto one JRE. 
> >>
> >> I think the base Xubuntu is in the 1.5-2 GB range, though I will confirm. 
> >> --
> >>
> >> /usr/local 2.5 GB
> >> /usr/share 1.6 GB
> >> /usr/lib 2.7 GB
> >> Tot 7.2
> >>
> >> /usr/local/share/gisvm 188 M
> >> /usr/local/share/data 765 M
> >>
> >> /usr/local/share/data/north_carolina 435 M
> >> /usr/local/share/data/natural_earth 249 M
> >>
> >> Seems like those last 2 are bigger than we expected 684 M before
> >> compression, likely 342 M on the ISO. 
> >>
> >> I believe we need to keep some of the NC dataset, there was talk
> >> specifically of hi res rasters and lidar which a few apps do want to use
> >> and might already be. That doesn't mean we need everything though. 
> >>
> >> Towns as a tif seem kinda odd, wouldn't it be more common to use a
> >> vector for that or show people how to convert it to raster for analysis
> >> purposes, etc.. (maybe I'm getting nit picky). 
> >> --
> >>
> >> I see and easy 200-300 MB (100-150 on the ISO) of things we can pick
> >> off. Should put us back closer to the goal. 
> >>
> >> Now to figure out why the beta4 iso is 100 MB more than the beta3 (I
> >> suspect it was Xubuntu updates)... 
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Alex
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Live-demo mailing list
> >> Live-demo at lists.osgeo.org
> >> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
> >> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
> >>
> > _______________________________________________
> Live-demo mailing list
> Live-demo at lists.osgeo.org
> http://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/live-demo
> http://wiki.osgeo.org/wiki/Live_GIS_Disc
>
>