Date: Fri, 28 Dec 2001 23:19:55 -0500 From: Zvezdan Petkovic <zvezdan@CS.WM.EDU> To: stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Why is splash in GENERIC? Message-ID: <20011228231955.A408@dali.cs.wm.edu> In-Reply-To: <3C2D1E15.A0227235@glue.umd.edu>; from bfoz@glue.umd.edu on Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 08:36:21PM -0500 References: <3C2D1E15.A0227235@glue.umd.edu>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Fri, Dec 28, 2001 at 08:36:21PM -0500, Brandon Fosdick wrote: > I noticed the thread a little while ago about shrinking the kernel to > get it on the release floppies (was that here or on hackers?) and splash > seems like a good candidate for the chopping block. AFAICT it's not > required if you don't want a splash screen and the install disks aren't > set up for a default splash screen. I just tried making a kernel without > splash and it seems to work fine, in fact I'm writing this email on the > same machine. Of course, I've only been running this kernel for a few > minutes so I guess something bad could crop up. Is there any reason its > included in GENERIC? > Don't mix the shrinking of the kernel to fit on the boot floppy (something that is really necessary) with shrinking features in GENERIC. GENERIC should be, well, _generic_. It contains as much useful features and drivers as necessary to satisfy most users/hardware. You are free to optimise your kernel for your machine/preferences of course. If you do not have SCSI -- no need to have those drivers in the kernel. If you do not like splash screen, so be it. -- Zvezdan Petkovic <zvezdan@cs.wm.edu> http://www.cs.wm.edu/~zvezdan/ To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-stable" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20011228231955.A408>