I found out about Okular (& Evince) from wikipedia when I learned from there that SumatraPDF loves DRM nonsense. So I followed wikipedia's links, ended up here,
http://windows.kde.org/download.php
& installed it.

I was expecting to ONLY get "Okular" when it was finished installing, because at the installer's "Package selection" screen, I went to "Kdegraphics > Okular" & checked it's box, & that was the ONLY box that I checked. What I got was something that is 622 MB in size! This has to be the biggest joke of all time.

1) Why isn't Okular available as an installer (or better yet, as a portable program) WITHOUT having to compiled? This question applies mostly to using Okular in Windows 7, but I've always been annoyed about the whole "jigsaw-puzzle" way of doing everything in linux in general.
2) When I used the "KDE on Windows" installer, Okular's check-box was the ONLY box that I checked, so why is the total install's size 622 MB?
3) Do I need ALL of that 622 MB just for Okular? If there is ANY of it that I can delete while still being able to use Okular, tell me.
4) In "KDE on Windows" installer, at the "Install mode" screen, I chose "End user" & "MinGW4 64-bit". Does that mean (I hope) that the program Okular was compiled as a 64-bit program?

Finally, this is a only half-related question, but I'll ask it since I'm already here anyway. Is there any way to use Okular to extract some/all images from a PDF? I know that Okular has a "Selection" tool, but that thing seems little better (if not identical to) doing a screen capture.

Both your post and my answer may be treated as trolling or flamewar or both, so.. you've been warned
Answering your questions:
ad 1. Distributing sources is a traditional and still most prefered way of sharing software with the world. Most users rely on their distribution's repositories, if yours don't include KDE and/or Okular in particular, contact your distibution vendor to update repos. If they don't wish to do this, you're on your own.
ad 2. Okular is part of KDE and as most parts of KDE it depends on kdelibs and few other shared libraries. If you used KDE based UNIX desktop, you would have all this stuff installed. Some of libraries are shared between desktop environments and generally between UNIX apps. But since you use Windows, which has allmost nothing in common with UNIX - you suffer from installing all that stuff. They are needed in order to run Okular and your OS doesn't provide them, hence your 622MB
ad 3. See above.
ad 4. Dunno.
ad half-related question: I think you can copy selection to clipboard and paste it, at least it is how it works on X11.

Currently the structure of KDE is indeed a bit intertwined, and most applications depend on most of the KDE "base" packages (such as the full kdelibs etc). The ongoing KDE Frameworks 5 effort aims to improve that situation. Until then, yes, that's what it's like -- you need quite some base packages to run anything at all, but in return the actual applications are very small.

That being said, it is quite possible that some packages have unnecessary and/or optional dependencies listed as required, so it might well install more than the minimal set of libraries required to run Okular. I don't know anything definitive though.

And yes, MinGW-64 bit most likely means that it's compiled for 64 bit systems.

Greetings,
Sven

scummos wrote:Currently the structure of KDE is indeed a bit intertwined, and most applications depend on most of the KDE "base" packages (such as the full kdelibs etc). The ongoing KDE Frameworks 5 effort aims to improve that situation. Until then, yes, that's what it's like -- you need quite some base packages to run anything at all, but in return the actual applications are very small.

Partially true: if a future application uses most of the Frameworks libraries, the global amount of used disk space won't change (as I suspect it will be the case for "big applications").
On the other side, if you need another KDElibs-based application, the used space will be most probably negligible.

Talking about Okular on Windows, I can't check now if all the features have been compiled in, but support for various file formats brings other libraries (poppler, djvu, libtiff, etc).

You can also contact the KDE/Windows community (see the links on the main page of the website, http://windows.kde.org/) for more details on the space used by Okular and its depenencies.

Have you tried to see from the installer which components uses more space?

Well, I'll uninstall it & try to find a smaller (much smaller) alternative (Evince first, & Nitro reader 3 2nd). Hopefully it'll be another PDF reader that doesn't impose any DRM nonsense on me. I know that at least "Nitro reader 3" claims to have an image extraction option.

Whoever's in charge of the "KDE on Windows Initiative" should at least consider putting something on that thing's page that tells people before they download & install it that they could be installing more than 600 MB just to install/use one of the KDE's programs.

tosky wrote:Partially true: if a future application uses most of the Frameworks libraries, the global amount of used disk space won't change (as I suspect it will be the case for "big applications").

That is true of course, but in the example of okular, it'll probably be very easy to name several major parts of kdelibs it doesn't *actually* depend on.

Greetings!

natsumerio wrote:Well, I'll uninstall it & try to find a smaller (much smaller) alternative (Evince first, & Nitro reader 3 2nd). Hopefully it'll be another PDF reader that doesn't impose any DRM nonsense on me.

My windows friends tell me foxit is the one to go for.