Wilko Bulte wrote: >On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 09:32:11AM -0600, M. Warner Losh wrote.. > > >>In message: <6ff30abd04102008163115a32d_at_mail.gmail.com> >> jamie rishaw at google mail <mitigator_at_gmail.com> writes: >>: What are the performance implications of a debug kernel? >>: >>: Disk space really shouldnt even be an issue.. if it is, and its down >>: to the difference of 20 megs, well, duno. 512 meg CF's going for >>: sub-$50 .. the only reason i could see even a debate would be any >>: significant performance hits.. >> >>So long as it can be turned off, I don't care too much. >> >>However, I'm going going to take exception that it isn't a disk space >> >> > >Sure.. and we have plenty of Viagra spam to prove it ;-) > > > >>starting to fill up. In addition, we sometimes deploy new kernels to >>the field and 16MB takes a lot longer to upload than 3MB (think really >>bad connectivity to many of the remote locations our systems may be >>deployed in). >> >> > >But I assume you would run a customised kernel on these machines anyway? > couldn't the instalation procedures install as stripped one if there wasn't room in /? it might save someone's hide.. > > > _______________________________________________ freebsd-arch_at_freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-arch-unsubscribe_at_freebsd.org"Received on Sat Jul 02 2005 - 23:03:43 UTC
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wed May 19 2021 - 11:38:38 UTC