You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Older versions of OpenHashTab were tiny, e.g. ac07e73 was 4.11mb, v3.0.2 was 2.96mb, then newer versions dropped features like 32-bit support and also massively increased in size, e.g. bc5897e was 10.2mb and all the latest versions v3.0.3 and up are also 10.2mb, while threatening to drop features like old Windows support.
I know it's still a tiny program, but why is it increasing almost 350% in size while dropping older Windows versions and 32bit processors? Seems counter-intuitive, less features should mean smaller size.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
PDBs (debug information) that I include so that anyone can debug crashes of the released builds, without rebuilding it themselves
Static linked CRT. This means a large part of the C runtime is linked into every dll and exe. This is so that people don't have to manually install the Visual C++ runtime. I could shave that off, resulting in much smaller binaries, but then I'd have to include the VC redistributable installer (25 MB), ultimately increasing the bundle size.
but then I'd have to include the VC redistributable installer (25 MB), ultimately increasing the bundle size.
You could make the installer download/open a page to download them if they're not installed, but most systems already have those installed. I personally use @abbodi1406 repack: https://github.com/abbodi1406/vcredist
Older versions of OpenHashTab were tiny, e.g. ac07e73 was 4.11mb, v3.0.2 was 2.96mb, then newer versions dropped features like 32-bit support and also massively increased in size, e.g. bc5897e was 10.2mb and all the latest versions v3.0.3 and up are also 10.2mb, while threatening to drop features like old Windows support.
I know it's still a tiny program, but why is it increasing almost 350% in size while dropping older Windows versions and 32bit processors? Seems counter-intuitive, less features should mean smaller size.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: