Date: Sat, 13 Jul 1996 20:20:51 -0700 From: Amancio Hasty <hasty@rah.star-gate.com> To: "Lenzi, Sergio" <lenzi@cwbone.bsi.com.br> Cc: "Sexton, Robert" <sextonr.crestvie@squared.com>, freebsd-hackers@freefall.freebsd.org Subject: Re: Kernel Config (Was: GENERIC Kernel Debate) Message-ID: <199607140320.UAA00618@rah.star-gate.com> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Sat, 13 Jul 1996 21:45:28 -0000." <Pine.BSF.3.91.960713213356.1178B-100000@home>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>From The Desk Of "Lenzi, Sergio" : > On Thu, 11 Jul 1996, Sexton, Robert wrote: > > Hello Robert, > I have been using sysV kernels for a long time too. Now I am an BSD > converted. The problem for kernel build time (30 minutes) or so seems to > be too long compared with of a SysV rel 3.2. The issue of 30minutes for a kernel compile has got to be due to gcc . Not sure what changed between gcc-1.42 and and gcc-2.x however simple minded experiments have shown that gcc-2.x takes about 3 times longer to compile. The other major factor is the cpu/disk/controller and if you have a minimally configured system, memory is important. It takes about 8 minutes to compile a kernel over here on my P100 with 32MB and fast disks. It would probably take less than 3 minutes to compile with the old gcc-1.42 . I would be nice if someone with access to gcc-2.x and gcc-1.42 to do a performance analysis ... As for the issue of a user friendly front-end to configure a kernel , I think that we have enough tools to do a decent job is just a matter of someone with enough drive to sit down and do it. Amancio
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199607140320.UAA00618>