Barebone kernel options request
tech-lists at zyxst.net
Mon Mar 11 15:56:17 UTC 2019
On Mon, Mar 11, 2019 at 01:54:48PM +0000, Carmel NY wrote:
>Just out of some sort of morbid curiosity, I would be interested in
>knowing exactly what problem the OP is trying to correct or alleviate
>here. If his storage, memory or whatever resources are stretched to the
>limit, he would be better served by purchasing a newer, more powerful
>machine. "You can't make a silk purse out of a sow's ear."
I dunno if this applies to the OP but I also compile custom kernels and
world for some machines. My basic reasons:
1. I want available only what is needed, for the os/machine's purpose,
so that there's more resources for the machine's job. Each disabled
option means that some resource of some type, however tiny, becomes
available. These add up.
2. Having only what you need means you have less to maintain, which is
important for security. I guess it makes the "vulnerability surface"
smaller, at least in theory.
3. It might be the case that the machine I'm maintaining isn't mine, so
the option to "buy better hardware" is out of the question.
Being able to tailor the OS for exactly the requirement in hand is a
major plus point in favour of FreeBSD for me. point #2 above is
particularly relevant for an internet-facing machine.
More information about the freebsd-questions