[lkml]   [2011]   [Nov]   [11]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
    SubjectRe: Evolution of kernel size
    On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:33:33PM +0900, Jérôme Pinot wrote:
    > Hi,
    > I took some time to make a graph of the evolution of the size of the
    > linux kernel tar.bz2 since version 1.0 till 3.1 (297 releases).
    > It doesn't count the stable branches (2.6.x.y).

    The question really is what are you trying to show with the graph, and
    what do you plan to use the graph for? If it is estimating the size
    of disk space that you'll need at some point in the future, that's
    fine. If it's for entertainment value, that's fine too.

    But if it's to try to make some claims about (for example) kernel
    complexity, you'd do better to measure the size of various specific
    subsystems, such as mm, core kernel, a specific file system, etc. And
    even then, the statistics can be misleading since sometimes
    refactoring to reduce complexity or removing unneeded abstraction
    layers can end up reducing the size of the subsystem, but leave it in
    a more maintainable state.

    - Ted
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to
    More majordomo info at
    Please read the FAQ at

     \ /
      Last update: 2011-11-11 17:53    [W:0.021 / U:20.324 seconds]
    ©2003-2017 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site