From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 20 21:01:19 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D6F1F16A4CE; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:01:19 +0000 (GMT) Received: from mail.vicor-nb.com (bigwoop.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.2]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF41843D1D; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:01:19 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from julian@elischer.org) Received: from elischer.org (julian.vicor-nb.com [208.206.78.97]) by mail.vicor-nb.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9751A7A439; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:01:19 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4176D21F.3060108@elischer.org> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 14:01:19 -0700 From: Julian Elischer User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.3.1) Gecko/20030516 X-Accept-Language: en, hu MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Wilko Bulte References: <41767CF1.2020005@FreeBSD.org> <6ff30abd04102008163115a32d@mail.gmail.com> <20041020.093211.78703993.imp@bsdimp.com> <20041020154026.GA40554@freebie.xs4all.nl> In-Reply-To: <20041020154026.GA40554@freebie.xs4all.nl> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: arch@freebsd.org cc: mitigator@gmail.com cc: current@freebsd.org cc: "M. Warner Losh" Subject: Re: [Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 21:01:20 -0000 Wilko Bulte wrote: >On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:32:11AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote.. > > >>In message: <6ff30abd04102008163115a32d@mail.gmail.com> >> jamie rishaw at google mail writes: >>: What are the performance implications of a debug kernel? >>: >>: Disk space really shouldnt even be an issue.. if it is, and its down >>: to the difference of 20 megs, well, duno. 512 meg CF's going for >>: sub-$50 .. the only reason i could see even a debate would be any >>: significant performance hits.. >> >>So long as it can be turned off, I don't care too much. >> >>However, I'm going going to take exception that it isn't a disk space >> >> > >Sure.. and we have plenty of Viagra spam to prove it ;-) > > > >>starting to fill up. In addition, we sometimes deploy new kernels to >>the field and 16MB takes a lot longer to upload than 3MB (think really >>bad connectivity to many of the remote locations our systems may be >>deployed in). >> >> > >But I assume you would run a customised kernel on these machines anyway? > couldn't the instalation procedures install as stripped one if there wasn't room in /? it might save someone's hide.. > > >