[vlc-devel] Re: Download size

[Jean-Paul Saman]

The osdmenu must be enabled in the next release, because I use it in a 
product and don't want to built a seperate VLC distribution for it.

Greetings,
Jean-Paul Saman.

Clément Stenac wrote:

>Hello,
>
>VLC packages sizes have steadily increased over the last few years:
>http://clement.stenac.org/projects/videolan/download.jpg
>
>While this is generally normal and acceptable, as VLC features have
>enlarged, this is a trend that we should try to fit.
>
>VLC remains quite lighter than most of its (proprietary) "competitors",
>but that difference is getting lower and lower, ... whereas it could be
>a good point for VLC.
>
>Most notably, from a few experiments I made, it appears that by removing
>the mozilla and IE plugins from the main win32 package, we could reduce
>its size by more than 40%. That's really a great improvement that could
>put us under the 5MB threshold.
>
>I think distributing these plugins as separate packages would be
>beneficial, as many people don't use them, and distributing both IE and
>FF plugins might not be very useful.
>
>Another thing is the osdmenu that was recently added. It adds more than
>2MB of png images, which lead to an increase of more than 500K. At the
>moment, the menu is not really usable by end users and I guess it won't
>be enabled yet so it's not yet a problem, but it will become one if the
>images are included. I think we could distribute the images sets as
>separate packages too (dionoea is working on a packages
>distribution/search system that could allow users to download such
>add-on packages from within vlc).
>
>The locales (in the zip package) need about 800Ko... Having
>language-specific packages could reduce them by about 650K, but that
>would make quite a burden IMHO.
>
>Apart from these big points, the fact is that it's quite hard to fight
>this size increase. VLC depends on more and more libs (1), which are
>often big. (For example, two recently added plugins, libxml and gnutls
>represent more than 1MB).
>
>There had been discussions about the possibility to enable
>mostly-builtins in our binary releases (or at least to turn some "core"
>modules that users probably don't want to change, like the audio
>converturs and stuff like that into builtins) to get rid of part of the
>shared object overhead, I don't remember exactly what had been decided
>and what had been done.
>
>  
>

-- 
This is the vlc-devel mailing-list, see http://www.videolan.org/vlc/
To unsubscribe, please read http://developers.videolan.org/lists.html