7 ms·
A 400mb+ install of bloat will upset many people This needs to be justified asap to help people understand and reconsider installing it.
by tremarley 1y ago
A 400mb+ install of bloat will upset many people
This needs to be justified asap to help people understand and reconsider installing it.
- hdjrudni 1y agoI was a little sus, so I checked: https://imgur.com/a/AJFQjfL https://imgur.com/a/AJFQjfL 897MB! But it appears to have installed itself twice for some reason. Maybe one is an 'update' which it didn't clean up...? I'm not sure. Edit: I just opened it and it cleaned itself up. 408MB now. I guess it was in the process of upgrading.
- eviks 1y agoSo the upgrades are not delta diffs either?
- wongogue 1y agoEven if it’s delta, it cannot patch itself when running on Windows. So it runs the updater, creates a new exec and switches to it after relaunch. Same as Chrome or Firefox.
- 1718627440 1y agoOS deficiency. And maybe programs shouldn't be allowed to update themselves.
- josephg 1y ago> maybe programs shouldn't be allowed to update themselves. Honestly I'd be all for this if the OS had a good autoupdate mechanism for 3rd party applications. But that's not the world we live in. Certainly not on windows - which is too busy adding antivax conspiracy articles to the start menu.
- torginus 1y agoIs it? On Linux, you can overwrite the file, but the underlying inode will still be open, and the 'invisble' old version will linger around - you don't have any easy way short of restarting everything to make sure the new versions are being used. And with Chromium this directly leads to crashes - when you update the browser as its open, the new tabs will open with the new version of the binary, with the old ones still using the old binary - which usually leads to crash. I prefer 'you cannot do X' instead of 'we allow you to do it, but it might misbehave in unpredictable ways'.
- 1718627440 1y agoI don't use Chromium. I never had issues with Apache, MySQLd, Firefox, Thunderbird, ... . You can even swap out the Linux kernel under userspace it still keeps all running.
- landr0id 1y agoStrangely it's the actual binary's .text section that's about 400MB. Time to dive in!
- pjmlp 1y agoWelcome to static linking of large applications. The world moved into dynamic linking in the 1980's for a reason. It is cool to advocate for a return to static linking when it is basic CLI tools.
- trenchpilgrim 1y ago> The world moved into dynamic linking in the 1980's for a reason. Reasons that no longer exist. Storage is cheap, update distribution is free, time spent debugging various shared lib versions across OSes is expensive.
- pjmlp 1y agoYet everyone is complaining on this thread about Zed distribution size, go figure. They should shut up and just buy bigger drives. Ah, they can't on their laptops, bummer. Also try to develop mobile apps with that mentality, https://www.abbacustechnologies.com/why-your-app-keeps-getting-uninstalled-mobile-app-development-solutions/ https://www.abbacustechnologies.com/why-your-app-keeps-getti...
- juliangmp 1y agoWill it though? I mean it's a lot for a "text editor", but much less than a classical IDE. And 400M is pretty negligible if you're on Windows, where your OS takes up dozens of GB for no reason.
- ktm5j 1y agoYeah I don't think 400M is really that big a deal. My `.emacs.d/` dir weighs in at over 1G and I've never thought twice about it. For people who are serious about their text editors, 400m is a small price to pay for something that works for you.
- eviks 1y agoIf the OS is already bloated, that leaves LESS space for your editor!