From 2aa66ceff5b28c197e2ef04bab71f03e0f34a71b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Patrick McDermott Date: Mon, 07 Aug 2017 14:07:15 -0400 Subject: dev/pkg/opkg/static: Downplay archive size compared to Packages sizes --- (limited to 'dev/pkg/opkg') diff --git a/dev/pkg/opkg/static.mdwn b/dev/pkg/opkg/static.mdwn index cb623b2..62c733f 100644 --- a/dev/pkg/opkg/static.mdwn +++ b/dev/pkg/opkg/static.mdwn @@ -45,7 +45,8 @@ would continue to depend on `libopkg.1`, while `opkg-static` would not. This allows platforms *without* other libopkg-using applications to use opkg without libopkg's symbols and allows platforms *with* other libopkg-using applications to share libopkg between multiple executables. This however comes at the -expense of increased package archive size. +expense of slightly increased package archive size (and, more importantly, the +size of package feed index files cached on ProteanOS systems). An alternative to the naming of the `opkg` and `opkg-static` binary package names is to use `opkg-dynamic` and `opkg`, respectively. @@ -60,7 +61,8 @@ executable that dynamically links against libopkg. This means duplicated code and some increase in file system usage on any platforms that may someday include some other libopkg-using application in the future. But it also minimizes file system usage on platforms where opkg is the only user of libopkg, like option 1, -and balances package archive size between options 1 and 2. +and balances package archive size between options 1 and 2 (and has the same +package feed index file sizes as option 1). Conclusion ========== -- cgit v0.9.1