Messages in this thread |  | | Date | Fri, 11 Nov 2011 11:51:01 -0500 | | From | Ted Ts'o <> | | Subject | Re: 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 majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
|  |