Comparing IMG files built from the same config map

[ObjectGardener]

Are there any tools available to compare two generated IMG files? I am generating one through an automated script and would like to be able to validate it against a production runtime image that was created via the ENVY GUI tool.
One other thing that I have noticed in doing this work is that each GUI tool generated IMG (and I believe automated as well) is a different size even when it built from the same startup image loading the same config map. Does someone have a good insight as to why this would be the case and how to explain the differences?
--Thanks. Mark

[rjs]

One other thing that I have noticed in doing this work is that each GUI tool generated IMG (and I believe automated as well) is a different size even when it built from the same startup image loading the same config map. Does someone have a good insight as to why this would be the case and how to explain the differences?

I once investigated one facet of this question and discovered the images differed in what font objects were included in the packaged image.

I didn't do much more research, once I identified the differences we saw in this one situation were "only"fonts. I think the pattern had to do with what the developer ran before packaging the image, but this was several years ago (perhaps 2005!).

Look at the various .ES files generated by the packager. One of them lists the various objects included in the packaged image. This will prove helpful in your comparison.

[ObjectGardener]

rjs Thanks for the response.
looking into each of the .es file makes me wish for more information, my automated verse manual build comparison reveals that only real differences occur in spusage.es (which is where I am assuming that you saw your font changes), I see MANY more changes than that there, but I am not overly concerned about that.
What causes me more pause is that there is a difference in the map.es file.... after deduping one to the other (automated to manual) I get a list of over 100 methods referenced in the automated builds map.es (many of which are part of the automated process) that are not in the manual and there are 31 methods referenced in the manual that are not in the automated version. None of the methods refenced are appliction code, all Et, Sts, AFS, and Ep code. All the other es files are functionally the same (apps, classes, classvar, cmethods and methods.es) so I *think* that I have functional equality. If I understood the map.es function I think that would help.
I have not seen anything close to documentation on these files, does anybody know of something like that?