ignoring packaging errors gives smaller icx?

VA Smalltalk is a "100% VisualAge compatible" IDE that includes the original VisualAge technology and the popular VA Assist and WidgetKit add-ons.

Moderators: Eric Clayberg, wembley, tc, Diane Engles, solveig

ignoring packaging errors gives smaller icx?

Postby Hal » Wed Jun 27, 2007 6:14 am

I imported a project from 5.5.2 to 7.5.1, then packaged.

In 5.5.2, there were 100s of packaging errors that had always been ignored. The resulting icx was 7,366 KB.

In 7.5.1, I packaged the same applications. Ignoring all packaging errors, the icx was 10,335 KB. (I'm not really concerned with the 3 MB growth - just mentioning all the numbers in case they help explain something).

Then I created packaging rules to ignore all errors that we weren't worried about. 99.9% of the rules were "safe send" or "known symbol". the other 0.1% are probably "exclude method" because the method had an error, but didn't have any senders. No additional applications were included. The resulting icx is 14,726 KB.

Why would these packaging rule changes cause the icx size to double?
Posts: 18
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2007 7:30 am

Postby wembley » Thu Jun 28, 2007 11:45 am

Hal -

The first place to look is in the statistics files created by the packager. Compare spusage.es from your original packaging run with spusage.es from your modified packaging run(s). This will show the differences in instances of various classes in the packaged image. You can also compare apps.es (applications included in the packaged image) and classes.es (classes included in the packaged image).

Once you've determined what's different there, it should be possible to discover why the packaged image size has doubled.

Please let me know what you discover.
John O'Keefe [|], Principal Smalltalk Architect, Instantiations Inc.
Posts: 405
Joined: Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:01 am
Location: Durham, NC

Return to VA Smalltalk 7.0, 7.5 & 8.0

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest