[Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?]

[Alex de Kruijff]

On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:58:35PM -0300, Marc G. Fournier wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Oct 2004, Alex de Kruijff wrote:
> 
> >>-------- Original Message --------
> >>Subject: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?
> >>Date: Mon, 18 Oct 2004 15:12:00 -0700 (PDT)
> >>From: Matthew Dillon <dillon at apollo.backplane.com>
> >>Newsgroups: dragonfly.kernel
> >>
> >>The only cost is disk space... e.g. 3MB stripped kernel verses 16MB
> >>debug kernel.  But the debug info isn't actually loaded into memory so
> >>the kernel load time and memory overhead is the same as with the stripped
> >>version.
> >>
> >>The issue is bug reports and kernel core dumps.  I can't count the number
> >>of times I have had to carefully instruct people to retrieve their
> >>kernel.debug's for bug reporting purposes.  And even my own debugging
> >>would be more convenient if I didn't have to save off a separate copy of
> >>the debug version of the kernel.
> >>
> >>What I'm thinking of doing is having the installkernel target install the
> >>debug version rather then the stripped version unless told to install
> >>the stripped version with a new option, e.g. 'options INSTALL_STRIPPED'.
> >>We would ship full debug GENERIC kernels instead of stripped kernels.
> >>i.e. we aren't getting rid of the ability to install a stripped kernel,
> >>we just aren't making it the default any more.
> >>
> >>What do people think?
> >
> >There are a couple downside.
> >
> >1. Performance issues. (i.e. Longer startup time)
> >2. There's more kernel to go in to the memory.
> 
> Ummm, from reading Matt's posting, neither of these two apply ... he 
> states this right in his first paragraph ...

I'm sorry I overlooked that.

-- 
Alex