Removing kernel options and devices in today's world
infofarmer at gmail.com
Tue Nov 1 16:04:36 PST 2005
On 10/29/05, Doug Poland <doug at polands.org> wrote:
> I've been using FreeBSD since 2.1.5 and have dutifully tweaked my
> kernels to include devices I need, and remove unwanted things. This
> made a big difference on 486's with 16MB of memory.
> Over the years I've developed a procedure for keeping track of changes
> in GENERIC and reducing the amount of time it takes to build a custom
> kernel for a given box.
> Fast-forward to 2005, PCI, SMP, gigabytes of RAM, kernel loadable
> modules and FreeBSD 6.x. As I begin preparing some boxes for updating
> to 6, I'm wondering if it's really worth the effort to tweak a kernel?
> And by this I mean removing devices and options. It's trivial to have
> an include for the devices/options I need to add to every kernel. But
> the list of things to take out keeps getting bigger and bigger and the
> chance for errors in editing increase.
> I'm thinking of just running GENERIC with necessary additions. Most of
> my boxes are workstations or department-sized servers supporting basic
> web, email, and file/print services. Architecture is all 32-bit Intel
> ranging from modest PIII to 4-way Xeon P4.
> I can come up with several arguments for both cases (running GENERIC vs.
> trimming all unneeded "fat" from a kernel). Has anyone else wrestled with
> this issue and come up with interesting conclusions?
> freebsd-questions at freebsd.org mailing list
> To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-questions-unsubscribe at freebsd.org"
I leave almost everything on my desktop machines, but
who needs usb, firewire and wifi on a production DB
More information about the freebsd-questions