[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <00aa01c967b4$8ffc2350$6602a8c0@bui.materna.com>
Date: Sat, 27 Dec 2008 00:49:15 +0100
From: "Roland" <devzero@....de>
To: <davidsen@....com>
Cc: <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
"Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...ozas.de>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] Compress kernel modules on installation
> >>> what about some "make modules_install_compressed" instead ?
> >>>
> >>> as i have run out of diskspace quite often when installing test
> >>> kernels, i
> >>> think we really need a feature like this.
> >>>
> >>> i`d also favour the makefile approach.
> >>> why another kconfig option?
> >>>
> >>> jan`s patch looks clean and simple, but i think it`s a little bit
> >>> intrusive...
> >>
> >> Why so? module-ini
> >
> > with "intrusive" i meant, that all modules are now compressed by default
> > and there is no switch to build them uncompressed.
> > so you change a long established default which may not be welcomed by
> > everyone and give no option for conservative people.
> >
> How many people use the option to install an uncompressed kernel?
i don`t know, probable few to none on pc/server hardware, but things may
look different in embedded sector...
btw, here is some real-world data on compression and block-alignment:
kernel 2.6.27.8
(du -sk) (du -sk --apparent-size)
uncompressed 72140 66554
gzip 29988 25447
gzip -9 29892 25374
roland
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists