I can’t start IE on a Turion X2 @2GHz, 4GB ram (win 7), because it
literally eats my CPU.
It crashes my PC. It is terrible.
Firefox works fine.
This
thread has been totally going OffTopic :)
But as I love this kind of
discussion, I will give my opinion.
1)Apps, not just MS ones, aren't
optimized anymore. I still remember the discussions, when coding, with
pointer=pointer+1; and pointer++; or how functions were optimized to be able to
run in a limited hardware. And sure, an old Internet Browser was "eating" about
10 MB while one nowadays needs about 200MB. 20 times more. Stats taken from
latest IE with just one tab opened, same applies to FF and Chrome.
2)Windows
7 is able to run with less than 1GB. I was able to run it in 512MB, not as its
antecessor Vista.But Vista was just an agreement with Hardware companies to
force the movement to 3GB Ram and x64 in laptops, preparing the scene for 7 and
8.
3)MS needs a new push. 7 doesnt introduce any new *killer* features for
Governments or *Commun* Enterprises. That is the main reason that nowadays XP is
still present in 80% of their computers which are being used mainly for
Writting/EXCELing purposes. The other 20% is coming from the new *enforced*
Pcs/Laptops which directly comes with 7 installed. I just know 1 company which
decided *freely* to move to 7, but it was a Videogames company. When you *force*
a company to move from one product to another one(i.e: stopping Support ) it
creates the current *not*lovely*image* MS has. The day MS is able to convince
people to buy freely their new OS version, that day its *$* image will begin to
change..
PS: Peace and Love.
> To:
ionucu@videotron.ca
> Date: Sun, 5 Jun 2011 12:35:20 +1000
> From:
geekdundee@gmail.com
> CC: ; drakekaizer666@gmail.com; elhoir@gmail.com;
ros-dev@reactos.org
> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for
cmake trees. ...
>
> On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 06:28:56 +1000, Alex
Ionescu <ionucu@videotron.ca>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 2011-06-04, at 3:43 PM, Adam wrote:
> >
>
>> Many got it pre-installed with their machines. Sure Windows 7 may run
> >> on pre-2007 machines if you bought it for over six thousand
bucks, but
> >> that still doesn't resolve another issue (which i
forgot to mention) -
> >> compatibility.
> >
> >
Windows 7 has about the same requirements as Windows XP if you do
> >
feature parity on both installs. Starting to refer to "over six thousand
> > bucks" is absurd.
>
> Had no idea. I thoght it needed
at least 1GB RAM and 16GB HDD space
> etcetera? That is well beyond the
requirements for Windows XP isn't it?
>
> >
> > A P4
could run Win 7 fine, and those have been around since 2000....
>
>
> >>
> >> Gotta love that philosophy "who cares
about 2.5GB or 8GB" - the
> >> operating system starts doing it,
and then all the programs follow.
> >> Remember MSN Messenger 1.0?
That was only a few hundred kilobytes to
> >> few megabytes to
install. Now its over 180MB to install.
> >
> > That includes
the size of the .NET framework and many other components
> > -- the
actual install is much smaller. Much of that is bitmap, picture
> >
data as well. Also, MSN Messenger 1.0 did not do things like webcam
>
> support, file transfers, etc... so I don't understand the point of the
> > comparison?
>
> MSN Messenger 1.0 did not include
things like a ridiculous skin which
> cannot be changed, advertisements,
etcetera either. The MSN installer does
> not include the .NET
framework.
>
> And is 180MB really needed for text chat AND webcam
support? Windows
> Messenger 5.1 also had webcam support. NetMeeting had
it too. They sure as
> hell weren't even 30MB large.
>
>
Here's another example: Adobe Reader - latest version has a 46MB
>
installer! It does fundamentally the same stuff as its predecessors, in
>
fact pretty much the same stuff as Adobe Reader 4.0 - yet the installer is
> ginormous! You can do similar stuff with Evince for example.
>
> And a classic example: Microsoft Internet Explorer - is very large
> compared to many other browsers.
>
> What I am trying to
get at is that when developers get this attitude that
> "ah 1.5GB doesn't
hurt since you can buy 1.5TB hard drives for ten bucks!"
> then the
software bloat begins.
>
> >
> >>
> >>
Which application do you want to bloat today?
> >>
> >>
<ps... i think the thread has been derailed>
> >
> >
Yes, it has, I demonstrated how "upgrade to Win7" is not such a strange
>
> thing to ask, and instead of accepting defeat to my arguments, you are
> > talking about 6000$ computers and MSN Messenger 1.0.
>
> Why should I accept defeat for an argument when I have not been
defeated?
> How is it not a strange thing to ask? So basically you are
suggesting that
> people should keep upgrading even if they do not want
to? What about
> enterprise users? They will indeed run into issues when
upgrading.
>
> Given all these 'arguments' of yours then, there
really is very little, if
> any, point of having ReactOS around in the
first place, since according to
> you everybody is capable of shelling
$$$ into Windows licenses
> unnecessarily.
>
> Next when
Windows 8 comes out will you be suggesting to drop Windows 7
> support
and upgrade to Windows 8 because it supports XYZ feature?
>
> The
talk about MSN messenger 1.0 and $6000 computers - I was attempting to
>
point out the attitude of a lot of developers today. "Oh lets make the
>
software big, since it doesn't matter if the user has to download all
>
100+MB of our installer even though our program doesn't do anything, and
> lets use all these cool frameworks and runtime libraries to make our
apps
> sound cool even though they are not needed" and all that which is
becoming
> more prevalent these days, compared to back then.
>
> A great motto then for you may be "Which of the users' resources do you
> want to waste today?"
>
> > So I'll quit now.
>
>
> > --
> > Best regards,
> > Alex
Ionescu
> >
> >>
> >> On Sun, 05 Jun 2011
05:34:20 +1000, Alex Ionescu <ionucu@videotron.ca>
> >>
wrote:
> >>
> >>> Windows 7 runs on pre-2007
computers just fine, so that's irrelevant.
> >>>
>
>>> Windows 7 is available as a trial, and also for free for students,
and
> >>> also for only 99$ as an upgrade to XP, which came out
a decade ago. So
> >>> there's people who don't have 99$/10
years? How did they get XP then?
> >>>
> >>>
Windows 7 does not take up 15GB of disk space. A fresh install of
>
>>> Ultimate uses 8.64GB.
> >>>
> >>> If
8.64GB is too much, you can use Windows 7 for Thin PCs, which is in
>
>>> CTP right now. It uses ~2.7GB of space for a fresh install, only
> >>> slightly higher than XP's 1.5.
>
>>>
> >>> (Also, who the cares about 2.5 or 8GB when you
can get a 1TB disk for
> >>> 100$ these days?)
>
>>>
> >>> --
> >>> Best regards,
>
>>> Alex Ionescu
> >>>
> >>> On
2011-06-04, at 3:03 PM, Adam wrote:
> >>>
>
>>>> I am aware of that. I was talking about Microsoft Windows and
not
> >>>> ReactOS - and was responding to someone who
suggested "Update to
> >>>> Windows Vista+, which has
KTM."
> >>>>
> >>>> Please read the messages
that are being replied to as well, other
> >>>> than just the
replies.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Sun, 05 Jun 2011
04:53:43 +1000, Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo
> >>>>
<elhoir@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
>
>>>>> Adam... ReactOS will not be Win Vista/7 ;)
>
>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:05 PM, Adam <geekdundee@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>
> >>>>>> And what about people with
computers older than 2007 and/or people
> >>>>>> who
do
> >>>>>> not want to (and/or cannot) pay $$$ for an
upgrade and/or people
> >>>>>> who do not
>
>>>>>> want to install an operating system that takes up 15GB
of disk
> >>>>>> space?
>
>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
>
>>>>>> On Sun, 05 Jun 2011 03:59:46 +1000, Alex Ionescu
> >>>>>> <ionucu@videotron.ca>
>
>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
>
>>>>>> Update to Windows Vista+, which has KTM.
>
>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>> Best regards,
> >>>>>>>
Alex Ionescu
> >>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>> On 2011-06-04, at 10:21 AM, Adam wrote:
>
>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> A number of
times (eg. .NET install/AV install) I have had it
>
>>>>>>> happen at
> >>>>>>>>
the end of the install. Then when I attempt to uninstall it there
>
>>>>>>>> are errors
>
>>>>>>>> produced regarding it (often not just after a
fresh install of
> >>>>>>>> Windows; I
>
>>>>>>>> mean after using the computer for some time -
particularly after
> >>>>>>>> updating
>
>>>>>>>> Windows Installer) then it makes the product
difficult (if not
> >>>>>>>> impossible)
>
>>>>>>>> to uninstall.
>
>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> On
Sun, 05 Jun 2011 00:07:44 +1000, Zachary Gorden <
>
>>>>>>>> drakekaizer666@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> And
how many times does the database get corrupted? I've never
>
>>>>>>>> run into
>
>>>>>>>>> it
>
>>>>>>>>> and the conditions that would cause a
corruption would equally
> >>>>>>>>> screw
any
> >>>>>>>>> other installer, since it would
have to be a run that got
> >>>>>>>>>
interrupted
> >>>>>>>>> mid-install.
>
>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Jun 4, 2011 at 8:58 AM, Adam
<geekdundee@gmail.com>
> >>>>>>>>>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>> Next will you be suggesting for people to
use MMC snapins as
> >>>>>>>>> opposed
to
> >>>>>>>>>> writing standalone
applications, because it is shitty standalone
>
>>>>>>>>>> applications that do things and not
MMC?
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>> You can use WIX/MSI to write shitty
installers too if I am not
> >>>>>>>>>>
mistaken.
> >>>>>>>>>> I've seen brilliant
NSIS/InstallShield installers and shitty MSI
>
>>>>>>>>>> installers.
>
>>>>>>>>>> And vice versa.
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>> As an end-user I must say MSI also
tends to piss me off,
> >>>>>>>>>>
particularly
> >>>>>>>>>> when
>
>>>>>>>>>> the database gets corrupted and what
not. Good concept though,
> >>>>>>>>>> but
I
> >>>>>>>>>> question the way it is
implemented. I have written about what I
>
>>>>>>>>>> think
>
>>>>>>>>>> about
>
>>>>>>>>>> MSI in another mail so no need for me
to repeat myself.
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>> But what I am trying to suggest is that
shitty installers will
> >>>>>>>>>>
be
> >>>>>>>>>> shitty
>
>>>>>>>>>> installers. You can write shitty
installers in
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>
SuperDuperUltraInstallerLanguageSoGoodItIsGuaranteedToMakeOtherInstallersShitTheirPantsAndGoBankrupt
>
>>>>>>>>>> and they will still be shitty
installers.
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, 04 Jun 2011 23:49:26 +1000,
Alex Ionescu
> >>>>>>>>>>
<ionucu@videotron.ca>
> >>>>>>>>>>
wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>> Oh, I do believe shitty
software/installers do this.
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Microsoft's technologies do not,
however.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> So use WIX/MSI, not
NSI/InstallShield.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Alex Ionescu
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> On 2011-06-04, at 9:23 AM, Kamil
Hornicek wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>> I'm in charge of 40+ PCs running
mostly XP at work. Believe me
>
>>>>>>>>>>> when I
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> tell you people do write their
own code (or use the available
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> API
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> incorrectly) for installers or
some online activation
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
bullshit. I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
came
> >>>>>>>>>>>> across several
installers/apps that were unable to detect or
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> use our
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> proxy
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> (we also use wpad for proxy
autodiscovery via dns) and I
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> always had
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> connect that PC directly to our
gateway to make stuff install
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> which
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> is
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> annoying as hell. I am not
making this up, pay me a visit if
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> think
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> otherwise.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> K.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
From: "Alex Ionescu" <
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> ionucu@videotron.ca>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "ReactOS Development List"
<ros-dev@reactos.org>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, June 03, 2011
8:20 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re:
[ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for cmake
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> trees. ...
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Again all of this is
irrelevant: since I think you are a
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Linux user,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> I
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> can understand why you are
confused.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Windows, all HTTP
communication is done by WinHTTP and/or
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WinINET,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> nobody writes their own
custom socket code.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> WinHTTP/WinINET control the
proxy settings for the machine.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> In fact,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> if
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> you use Google Chrome on
Windows (or Safari) and go to the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> proxy/connection
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings, you will see
"IE's" proxy connection dialog --
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> because
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> these
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> settings/dialog are owned
by the OS Library, not the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> individual
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> applications.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Therefore, the installer
will use 100% the same settings as
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> the web
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> browser, including the same
protocol.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> So, as I stated, if the
browser can download foo.exe, so
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> will the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> online
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> installer.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best regards,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alex Ionescu
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2011-06-03, at 1:50 PM,
Kamil Hornicek wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> whatever you use for
downloading the installer has to be
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> configured
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> to
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connect throught the
proxy and also to use its dns services
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> host name
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> resolving. if the
installer itself isn't aware of the need
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> for
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proxy server
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (or is not able to
connect through socks or whatever the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proxy
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> uses) it
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> won't be usually able
to resolve the hostname it's trying to
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> connect to
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (depends on the exact
network configuration). also the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> default
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> route to the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> internet would be
missing or direct outgoing connections
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> would be
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> blocked
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> (which they usually are
otherwise you wouldn't be forced to
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> use the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> proxy
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> server in the first
place) so the traffic generated by the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> installer
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wouldn't have any means
to reach its destination.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't want to derail
the discussion and I apologize for
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'll
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shut up next
time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Kamil
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original Message
----- From: "Alex Ionescu" <
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
ionucu@videotron.ca
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: "ReactOS
Development List" <ros-dev@reactos.org>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday, June 03,
2011 7:03 PM
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Subject: Re: [ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for cmake
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trees.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Since online installers
use HTTP, and the user got the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> installer
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> off
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> HTTP, what would a
proxy server change?
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best
regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Alex Ionescu
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2011-06-03, at
12:33 PM, Kamil Hornicek wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I didn't want to
spam this discussion but I have to.. What
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> every
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> other software
company also does is refusing to believe
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> someone
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might
be
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
behind a proxy server. If you go this way, please make
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sure
the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
installer
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't need a
direct connection. Also online installers
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> are
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> generally
a
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> major
pain in the ass if you don't provide an offline
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
installer
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> too.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ----- Original
Message ----- From: Alex Ionescu
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> To: ReactOS
Development List
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sent: Friday,
June 03, 2011 5:56 PM
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Subject: Re:
[ros-dev] 1294 [dreimer] Fix clean for cmake
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> trees.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ...
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Why separate
installers for x64/ARM?
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Just do what
every software company this side of the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> century
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> does: a
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 400kb installer
which lets you select the packages you
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> want,
and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
downloads
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> them.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Best
regards,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Alex
Ionescu
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 2011-06-03,
at 11:38 AM, Zachary Gorden wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Spoke with
Amine and Daniel. I've agreed to the lesser
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> evil of
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> bundling the
FULL cmake. Reasons are if we want the BE
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> to be
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
flexible
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> enough to be
used for more than just building ROS, we
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> can't
gimp
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
cmake with
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the belief that
no one will need the things we didn't
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
include.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> This is
again
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
on Windows. I remain uninvolved with decisions about the
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Linux
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> BE.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Fri, Jun 3,
2011 at 10:34 AM, Colin Finck
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
<colin@reactos.org>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Timo Kreuzer
<timo.kreuzer@web.de> wrote:
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> My vote on
this:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
CMake: bundle it, optional on installation
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> x64/arm: create
individual installers
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * CMake: bundle
it, go for the (minimal) version without
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> an
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> installer. It's
nothing "exotic" to install after all,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just
put
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it
together
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with the other
utilities in RosBE.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> * x64/arm: If
build tool sizes are staying like this,
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> create
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> individual
installers. Just for testing, I'll try an
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> x86/x64
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> multilib
build
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
of Binutils and GCC though, would be nice to know how much
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> smaller it
is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
compared to separate x86 and x64 compilers.
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> So in general,
I agree with Timo :-)
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> - Colin
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing
list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>
>>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>
>>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>> --
>
>>>>>>>>>> Using Opera's revolutionary email
client:
> >>>>>>>>>>
http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>
>>>>>>>>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
--
> >>>>>>>> Using Opera's revolutionary email
client:
> >>>>>>>>
http://www.opera.com/mail/
> >>>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>
>>>>>>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
>
>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
_______________________________________________
>
>>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing list
>
>>>>>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>
>
>>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
>
>>>>>> Using Opera's revolutionary email client:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
> >>>>>>
>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>
>>>>>> Ros-dev mailing list
> >>>>>>
Ros-dev@reactos.org
> >>>>>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>>>>
> >>>>
>
>>>>
> >>>> --
> >>>> Using
Opera's revolutionary email client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
>>>>
> >>>>
_______________________________________________
> >>>> Ros-dev
mailing list
> >>>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
>>>> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>
>>>
> >>>
> >>>
_______________________________________________
> >>> Ros-dev
mailing list
> >>> Ros-dev@reactos.org
> >>>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
> >>
>
>>
> >> --
> >> Using Opera's revolutionary email
client: http://www.opera.com/mail/
> >
>
>
> --
> Using Opera's revolutionary email client:
http://www.opera.com/mail/
>
>
_______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing
list
> Ros-dev@reactos.org
>
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing
list
Ros-dev@reactos.org
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev