Static build - size of exe too big
-
Hi,
we are statically building our executables since we mainly want to use the uniform GUI.
Problem is though that the executable is way too big (approx. 15MB), compared to the actual program (~ 1MB) we want to run.
Is there any way to reduce the size of the .exe files, essentially loading only those components which are necessary for the GUI to be displayed correctly?Many thanks and best regards,
Christos@christos.alewa
Hello,we are statically building our executables since we mainly want to use the uniform GUI.
This doesn't constitute a great reasoning for static building in my opinion. Are you sure static linking is what you want (or need)?
Is there any way to reduce the size of the .exe files, essentially loading only those components which are necessary for the GUI to be displayed correctly?
My best advice for that question would be - you could build and link dynamically instead of static.
The second best - strip all symbols and resources from the executable.If you provide a bit more on your use case it might attract some better answers.
Kind regards.
-
@christos.alewa
Hello,we are statically building our executables since we mainly want to use the uniform GUI.
This doesn't constitute a great reasoning for static building in my opinion. Are you sure static linking is what you want (or need)?
Is there any way to reduce the size of the .exe files, essentially loading only those components which are necessary for the GUI to be displayed correctly?
My best advice for that question would be - you could build and link dynamically instead of static.
The second best - strip all symbols and resources from the executable.If you provide a bit more on your use case it might attract some better answers.
Kind regards.
wrote on 16 Jun 2016, 14:06 last edited by@kshegunov
Hi and thanks for your quick answer.Since we want to start the GUI over the web, it would be much more helpful if it was just one, small, statically linked, file.
That would be executed - provide the GUI - and then, if necessary, start & download our tool.
To your second advice, that is probably the true answer i was looking for, but how can i strip all symbols and resources from the executable?Thanks again.
-
@kshegunov
Hi and thanks for your quick answer.Since we want to start the GUI over the web, it would be much more helpful if it was just one, small, statically linked, file.
That would be executed - provide the GUI - and then, if necessary, start & download our tool.
To your second advice, that is probably the true answer i was looking for, but how can i strip all symbols and resources from the executable?Thanks again.
Hello,
Here's a way to do it with g++, but note that this is platform-dependent, so I have no idea if it's even possible with MS's compiler or on OSX.
As a side note 15MB is a bit big for a release build, even with static linking. What Qt modules do you include in that? If possible strip out as much as you can in terms of libraries and code.Kind regards.
-
Hi,
Out of curiosity, what do you mean by "start the GUI over the web" ?
-
wrote on 20 Jun 2016, 11:37 last edited by
@SGaist
Essentially, download the executable and run it.
That's why size is an issue. -
What modules are you using for your application ?
-
wrote on 20 Jun 2016, 12:20 last edited by
@SGaist
QCore, QGUI & QWidget.. -
From the server side you should send your files as compressed data.
On the Qt side, since you are building Qt yourself anyway, you can try disabling features your application don't need. See the qfeatures.txt file for what you can disable.
On a side note, don't forget the licensing constraints that comes with a static build of Qt.
-
From the server side you should send your files as compressed data.
On the Qt side, since you are building Qt yourself anyway, you can try disabling features your application don't need. See the qfeatures.txt file for what you can disable.
On a side note, don't forget the licensing constraints that comes with a static build of Qt.
wrote on 21 Jun 2016, 12:35 last edited by@SGaist
It seems that it is indeed, already optimized, since we did disable many features, until it could not be build anymore - but we're still facing the same sized executable.Thank you, though, maybe we'll figure it out eventually.
11/11