From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Thu Oct 21 08:17:24 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4413716A4CE for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:17:24 +0000 (GMT) Received: from web.portaone.com (mail.russia.cz [195.70.151.35]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F1B643D53 for ; Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:17:23 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Received: from [192.168.0.73] (portacare.portaone.com [195.140.247.242]) (authenticated bits=0) by web.portaone.com (8.12.11/8.12.11) with ESMTP id i9L8HIU1046540 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Thu, 21 Oct 2004 10:17:21 +0200 (CEST) (envelope-from sobomax@portaone.com) Message-ID: <41777084.2050504@portaone.com> Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 11:17:08 +0300 From: Maxim Sobolev Organization: Porta Software Ltd User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 0.8 (Windows/20040913) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Rob References: <20041020170115.EDCD016A4EF@hub.freebsd.org> <417748F2.3060506@vwsoft.com> <4177568A.1040502@yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <4177568A.1040502@yahoo.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit cc: freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped,/kernel ?] X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 21 Oct 2004 08:17:24 -0000 Rob wrote: > Volker wrote: > >> Maxim + all, >> >>> >>> I think that this is good idea which can be adapted for our 6-CURRENT >>> as well. Disk space is so damn cheap today.... >>> >>> -Maxim >>> >> >> <2ct> >> well, that's the same as the M$ people thought ten years back. "Size & >> price doesn't matter, so let's waste every Meg we could find." >> >> Doing it that way in every corner, you'll have a system which requires >> plenty of Gigs to install in a few years. A debug kernel by default >> would just be the beginning of a systematic waste. >> >> Why do you love BSD? Because it's different? Well, I love my beasty >> because it installs and runs in small to large size systems. And I >> love it because it's fast. If you blow up everything, your beasty will >> get slow, fat and ugly. >> >> Personally I would not care about a debugging kernel on my disk but >> the way poeple think (size doesn't matter, price doesn't matter) it's >> the very first step into the direction of blowing up everything - >> because size doesn't matter. >> >> Intel & Co will welcome you very friendly because going that way >> you'll always need the latest computer systems to run your beasty. >> > > > I have two Pentium1 PCs happily running 4-Stable. > I also hope my two little Pentium1 PCs, with small harddisks and minimal > RAM will be able to cope with future designs of FreeBSD. It's the beauty > of having a state-of-the-art OS on such an old system, whereas for my M$ > companions the PCs barely can run Windows 98 !! C'mon guys, nobody says it should be unconditional. Of course there should be an easy, well-documented way to turn it off in situations when the space really matters. -Maxim