From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG Wed Oct 20 17:41:30 2004 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.FreeBSD.org (mx1.freebsd.org [216.136.204.125]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2D53A16A4CE; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:41:30 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pooker.samsco.org (pooker.samsco.org [168.103.85.57]) by mx1.FreeBSD.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BA37543D2D; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:41:29 +0000 (GMT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Received: from [192.168.254.11] (junior-wifi.samsco.home [192.168.254.11]) (authenticated bits=0) by pooker.samsco.org (8.12.11/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i9KHfpCY050705; Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:41:52 -0600 (MDT) (envelope-from scottl@freebsd.org) Message-ID: <4176A2E9.2010801@freebsd.org> Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 11:39:53 -0600 From: Scott Long User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; FreeBSD i386; en-US; rv:1.7.2) Gecko/20040929 X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Brooks Davis References: <41767CF1.2020005@FreeBSD.org> <20041020165900.GB834@alex.lan> <41769E70.4020808@FreeBSD.org> <20041020172955.GG11477@odin.ac.hmc.edu> In-Reply-To: <20041020172955.GG11477@odin.ac.hmc.edu> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.86.1.0 X-Enigmail-Supports: pgp-inline, pgp-mime Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=3.8 tests=none autolearn=no version=2.63 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 2.63 (2004-01-11) on pooker.samsco.org cc: Maxim Sobolev cc: Alex de Kruijff cc: "current@freebsd.org" cc: arch@freebsd.org Subject: Re: [Fwd: What do people think about not installing a stripped /kernel ?] X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.1 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 20 Oct 2004 17:41:30 -0000 Brooks Davis wrote: > On Wed, Oct 20, 2004 at 08:20:48PM +0300, Maxim Sobolev wrote: > >>Let me clarify it down: it is only applies to HEAD, that is, unstable >>branch, which can be inheretedly buggy. STABLE/RELEASE doesn't really >>need this feature. This dismisses the following objections: > > > I think it's more important in HEAD, but personally I would like to ship > this way. It has the potential to vastly improve the quality of bug > reports. That's not my call though. > > >>1. HDD size constrains: nobody really want to run unpatched HEAD on CF >>or the like, since with HEAD you are expected to re-compile more than often. >> >>2. / partition size: anybody running HEAD is expected to allow this >>accomodate debugging kernel. >> >>3. Additional slowdown: since it is adds up to 10 seconds (I bet that >>even less on a modern system) who cares? This is HEAD, so that it is >>expected to be sub-optimal performance-wise. > > > I seriously doubt it's measurable. If it is, the loader is broken. :-) > We're talking about reading a section header and doing a seek for each > ELF section we don't care about (all the ones that bloat the file > relative to the stripped version.) > > -- Brooks Actually, another possbility would be to have the kernel install target install the stripped kernel into /boot/kernel/kernel and the debug kernel into /var/kernel/kernel.debug or some similar location. Scott