31–40 of 42 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any ideas on the future of reduced-size IPFS utilities. For example, the go-ipfs Linux packages are somehere around 24MB. Is this a problem anyone is working on.
what platforms are you targetting that cant take 24mb?
24MB is just the total for the compressed packages. The ipfs binary is actually over twice that size.
What I really want is a private, secure IPFS. I do want the network functionality, but I want it to exist only between my nodes. I know I can pin encrypted blobs, but I want something that handles this transparently. Is this possible somewhere?
Freenet allows connecting only to peers, and is the same sort of p2p hash-based storage cache. It's about as old as Tor.
This entire project can be replaced in two different ways with just IPFS. You don't have to run IPFS to be able to add files or retrieve them (if you've added them on the same computer), so simply add the files without running the daemon and you're already "Offline and Private" and "IPFS without the Network". If that's not enough, you can also run your IPFS daemon with `--offline` and it won't connect to any network,…
Any ideas on the future of reduced-size IPFS utilities. For example, the go-ipfs Linux packages are somehere around 24MB. Is this a problem anyone is working on.
This entire project can be replaced in two different ways with just IPFS. You don't have to run IPFS to be able to add files or retrieve them (if you've added them on the same computer), so simply add the files without running the daemon and you're already "Offline and Private" and "IPFS without the Network". If that's not enough, you can also run your IPFS daemon with `--offline` and it won't connect to any network,…
I see the “ipfs less” terminology as similar to the term “serverless”. Just like how serverless still has servers but the point is that you don’t have to maintain your own server, ipfs less does make sense in that you don’t have to run ipfs node to use it. But also just like how many people hate the term serverless, ipfs less will be hated by many as well. I guess at the end of the day what’s important is whether som…
Really terrible branding; consider that the currently top-voted comment has read the site enough to formulate an alternative design and still has completely misunderstood how this relates to IPFS. The rest of the site is neat, though! I hope the author reconsiders!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
what platforms are you targetting that cant take 24mb?
Embedded systems, small form factor computers that have limited resources, older computers. 24MB is just the total for the compressed packages. The ipfs binary is actually over twice that size.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
People are working on smaller unixy tools to do fewer things well, but at least for the main codebase we are limited by go itself. Making binaries smaller is not simple at all... You might be interested in checking out the rust implementation: https://github.com/rs-ipfs/rust-ipfs Im not actually sure how well it would work for what youre after, but it is an option!
I was thinking more along the lines of splitting up the whopping 56MB single binary into smaller, individual programs. There is a version of libp2p, which is the library used by IPFS, that is written in C++. Perhaps that is another option.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Embedded systems, small form factor computers that have limited resources, older computers. 24MB is just the total for the compressed packages. The ipfs binary is actually over twice that size.
I mean, if you are on a sufficiently-embedded system that you don't have 24MB of disk space, you almost certainly don't have enough RAM or CPU to run IPFS anyway.
(Your guess may be incorrect)
In some cases I have 24MB but I want to conserve space for other programs. The go-ipfs uncompressed binary is 56MB not 24MB.
That is a multiple times larger than the combined size of the kernel and userland I use.
Seems like making ipfs run on smaller systems is a goal some are interested in pursuing. I could be wrong but I doubt I am the the only one interested in this.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Any ideas on the future of reduced-size IPFS utilities. For example, the go-ipfs Linux packages are somehere around 24MB. Is this a problem anyone is working on.
is 24mb really considered big these days? ive been to home pages that are heavier than that.
I use a text-only browser. It does not automatically source resources external to the page. I do not experience "heavy" pages. What you refer to is probably what happens when pages try to source a gazillion different resources.