Messages in this thread |  | | | Date | Sun, 30 Mar 1997 03:13:17 -0500 | | From | "David S. Miller" <> | | Subject | Re: 2.1 kernel bloat revisited |
| |
Date: Sat, 29 Mar 1997 21:05:02 +0000 (GMT) From: "Mark A. Breuer" <breuer@nfinity.com> Linux is not windows. Just cause the source code is growing, doesn't mean that the image(s) you need to boot need to be larger!
While I like all the new things Linux is doing, and this is making it bigger, I'd like to quote the original author because I think you missed that he did say the kernel "image" is getting bigger but I doubt you missed this intentionally.
On Sat, 29 Mar 1997 kdp0101@hpmail.lrz-muenchen.de wrote:
> I noticed that the 2.1.29 kernel image is much bigger than the 2.0.29 > image. To check it out I wrote a small perl script to compare > "nm --size-sort -t d" listings. It only gives a rough estimate of course > but it is still a useful bloat-o-meter. When it comes to the kernel, those who think big are usually very small ;-) As Eric Schenk said we should look into where exactly the image bloat is coming from.
---------------------------------------------//// Yow! 11.26 MB/s remote host TCP bandwidth & //// 199 usec remote TCP latency over 100Mb/s //// ethernet. Beat that! //// -----------------------------------------////__________ o David S. Miller, davem@caip.rutgers.edu /_____________/ / // /_/ ><
|  |